Matarese v. Caldarone

• Citation: 26 R.I. 348,58 A. 976
• Parties: MATARESE v. CALDARONE et al.
• Decision Date: 30 July 1904
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Rhode Island

58 A. 976

26 R.I. 348

MATARESE

v. CALDARONE et al.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

July 30, 1904.

Creditors' bill by Francesco P. Matarese against Ferdinando Caldarone and another. Heard on demurrer to bill. Demurrer sustained.

Argued before STINESS, C. J., and TILLINGHAST and DOUGLAS, JJ.

Charles A. Walsh, for complainant.

Edward D. Bassett, for respondents.

TILLINGHAST, J. The bill sets out that on the 13th day of February, 1903, the complainant owned and operated a liquor saloon in Providence, having a license therefor, and that he then transferred a one-half interest therein to the respondent Ferdinando, with whom he formed a copartnership to carry on said business, the latter paying a certain sum in cash for said one-half interest in the business, and also giving four promissory notes for the sum of $100 each, said notes being payable in four, eight, twelve, and sixteen months, respectively, from February 13, 1903; and that the copartnership carried on said business until August 15, 1903, at which time complainant sold his one-half interest therein to his partner, Ferdinando, for the sum of $250; that during the negotiations referred to the respondent Carlo Caldarone was present and advised said Ferdinando; and the complainant alleges that he is informed and believes that said Carlo furnished the money for said transaction to said Ferdinando. The bill further sets out that the second note in the series above mentioned fell due on the 13th day of October, 1903; that previous thereto said Ferdinando transferred all of his interest in the business to said Carlo, and applied for a transfer of the license to him; and that the complainant is informed and believes that the sole purpose of said transfer was to prevent the complainant from collecting said note out of the tangible property of said Ferdinando. The complainant avers, and says he is ready to prove, that said Ferdinando Caldarone has no other tangible property except the saloon in question, and, further, that though requested he has refused to pay the note aforesaid at the maturity thereof; that at and after the transaction by which the complainant transferred his interest in the business to said Ferdinando he requested said Carlo to indorse the notes above mentioned, which he refused to do, and also advised the maker thereof not to provide an indorser therefor. The bill then alleges that said Carlo Caldarone was fully informed of all the matters and things between the complainant and said Ferdinando before the transfer of the saloon to the latter, and that said Carlo knew that the notes which were given to the complainant as a part of the purchase price therefor were still outstanding and...