Looney v. Gillenwaters

• Decision Date: 30 September 1872
• Citation: 58 Tenn. 133
• Parties: Looney v. Gillenwaters.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

58 Tenn. 133

Looney

v.Gillenwaters.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

September Term, 1872.

FROM HAWKINS.

Appeal from the Chancery Court at Rogersville, May Term, 1871. H. C. SMITH, Ch.

______________, for Complainants.

Kirkpatrick, for defendant, said:

The principal errors relied on in this cause upon which a reversal is asked are the following, viz.:

1. The master, in stating his account, charges defendant, Gillenwaters, with $125, and the interest thereon for -- years, making the total sum of $--, as so much lost to the partnership concern by said partner's having paid more by one-fourth cent per pound for hogs purchased than was agreed should be paid, although the proof shows that the hogs thus purchased were put into drove, taken to market and sold, and the profits arising therefrom divided equally among the parties. Upon this point I can find no express authority.

2. The master charges defendant, Gillenwaters, the sum of $20, amount paid by complainant, Charles, to James Sevier, for said defendant. This transaction was purely an individual one, and should not be taken into account on the settlement of the co-partnership business.

3. The master charges defendants with numerous items, to sustain which there is no proof whatever in the record, the same appearing only by bare mention in complainant's answer to the cross-bill; and the stating the same in said answer is not in response to any allegation in the cross bill.

FREEMAN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

This bill was filed to wind up and settle a partnership entered into in 1853 in buying and selling a drove of hogs, to be bought in East Tennessee and sent south and there disposed of.

It is alleged in the bill that the contract of partnership expressly stipulated that the two partners, Charles and Gillenwaters, were not to pay for hogs more than four cents per pound gross, they attending to the purchase of the hogs, the other partner, Robinson, being absent in the south at the time on a trading expedition. It is charged that Gillenwaters, in violation of this stipulation, purchased a large number of hogs, perhaps two hundred head, and paid, or contracted to pay, $4.25 per hundred pounds, and that the firm were bound by these contracts, and had the price to pay, but that Charles never consented to the payment of such additional price. The amount then paid out and over and above the price agreed to be paid by the terms of the contract of partnership, is shown to have been...