§
Harris v. Comm'r

8 Cited authorities

  1. Costello v. Costello

    209 N.Y. 252 (N.Y. 1913)   Cited 96 times
    In Costello v. Costello et al., 209 N.Y. 252, at page 259, 103 N.E. 148, 151, Judge Collin said: "The death of the testator dissolved the firms, and the interest passed to his executors.

  2. Kent v. Universal Film Manufacturing Co.

    200 App. Div. 539 (N.Y. App. Div. 1922)   Cited 20 times
    In Kent v. Universal Film Mfg. Co. (200 App. Div. 539, 546) this, court by Mr. Justice LAUGHLIN, said: "No theory is presented or could be presented by which the Supreme Court of this State has not jurisdiction over a domestic corporation.

  3. Bank v. Carrollton Railroad

    78 U.S. 624 (1870)   Cited 12 times

    DECEMBER TERM, 1870. 1. A party coming into the right of a partner, whether by purchase from such partner (no matter how broad the language of the conveyance may be) or as his personal representative, or under an execution or commission of bankruptcy, comes into nothing more than an interest in the partnership, which cannot be tangible, made available, or be delivered but under an account between the partnership and the partner. 2. Where a complainant's right is thus only an equity to share in the

  4. Menagh v. Whitwell

    52 N.Y. 146 (N.Y. 1873)   Cited 39 times
    In Menagh v. Whitwell, and all kindred cases, there was, substantially a donation of firm property to pay the debt of an individual partner without any consideration moving to the firm.

  5. Nirdlinger et al. v. Bernheimer

    30 N.E. 561 (N.Y. 1892)   Cited 10 times

    Argued March 10, 1892 Decided April 12, 1892 James W. Hawes for appellants. George H. Yeaman for respondent. Charles P. Daly for respondents. MAYNARD, J. The plaintiffs, as the representatives and successors of Frederick Nirdlinger, have brought this action to establish the right of their intestate as a sub-partner of his brother Jacob in a joint venture, which the latter entered into with six associates in the year 1854, for the purchase and sale at a profit of lands in the state of Minnesota. One

  6. Rockafellow v. Miller

    14 N.E. 433 (N.Y. 1887)   Cited 5 times

    Argued October 19, 1887 Decided December 13, 1887 Frank J. Dupignac, for appellant. Frederick G. Dow for respondent. DANFORTH, J. The plaintiff, claiming to be a creator of Sam. H. Miller and Jesse E. Folk, after service of the summons on the defendant Folk, recovered judgment against them as joint debtors in the sum of $1,064.48. Execution issued against the joint property of Miller and Folk, and the individual property of Folk was returned nulla bona. This action was then brought by the plaintiff

  7. Burnett v. Snyder

    81 N.Y. 550 (N.Y. 1880)   Cited 10 times
    In Burnett v. Snyder (supra) it was held that one contracting with a partner to share in his profits and bear a proportionate part of his losses as a partner does not become a copartner even as to third parties.

  8. UNITED STATES v. HACK ET AL

    33 U.S. 271 (1834)   Cited 9 times

    JANUARY TERM, 1834. The priority of the United States does not extend so as to take the property of a partner from partnership effects, to pay a separate debt, due by such partner to the United States, when the partnership effects are not sufficient to satisfy the creditors of the partnership. It is a rule too well settled to be now called in question, that the interest of each partner in the partnership property, is his share in the surplus, after the partnership debts are paid; and that surplus