Pettyjohn v. Woodroof

• Decision Date: 23 January 1890
• Citation: 86 Va. 478,10 S.E. 715
• Parties: Pettyjohn v. Woodroof.
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court

10 S.E. 715

(86 Va. 478)

Pettyjohn

v.Woodroof.

Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia.

Jan. 23, 1890.

Partnership—Individual Liability.

In Virginia, on the death of a partner, the firm assets are applied to the firm debts, and, these being insufficient, the firm creditors are then entitled, for any unpaid balance, to share as general creditors, on an equal footing with the separate creditors of the same class, in the separate assets of the deceased partner.

E. S. Brown, for appellant. Kirkpatrick & Blackford, R. G. H. Kean, and J. H. Lewis, for appellee.

Fauntleroy, J. This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court of the city of Lynchburg, rendered on the 25th day of February, 1888, in vacation, in the chancery suits therein depending of Woodroof, etc., v.Spence, Surviving Partner, etc., and Pettyjohn, etc., v. Woodroof's Executor; the said two causes having been united, and heard together. Seth Woodroof and William Q. Spence were partners, doing business in Lynchburg as private bankers and brokers, under the style of Woodroof & Spence. Seth Woodroof died the 4th day of August, 1875, leaving William Q. Spence surviving him, and John W. Daniel qualified as executor of his will. There were no liens on the social assets nor on the separate estate of Seth Woodroof deceased, by judgment or otherwise, and no priorities of any sort. Accounts were ordered and taken, and reported to the court, showing the insolvency of the partnership, the social debts being $61,911.11 and the social assets $39,-340.76. The Separate debts of the deceased partner, Seth Woodroof, were reported to be $7,874.28, and his separate assets, $10,-980.73; and the commissioner reported a scheme for distributing the social assets among the social creditors, and the separate assets among the separate creditors, carrying the surplus over to the social creditors, and distributing it among them. The social creditors excepted to this plan of distribution, and contended that, there being no specific liens or priorities in the case, the separate assets of the deceased partner, Seth Woodroof, in the hands of his executor, are to be applied ratably to his individual debts and the unpaid balances due the social creditors, after exhausting the social assets. The circuit court sustained this exception, and decreed, accordingly, that, the social assets having been properly distributed among the social creditors, and proving insufficient to pay them in full, they are entitled, as to the unpaid portions...