Buford Bros. v. Sontheimer

Citations

• 116 La. 500
• 40 So. 851
• 1906 La. LEXIS 523

Syllabus

<p>1. Partnership—Silent Partners — Estoppel.</p> <p>Defendant who in fact was not a partner in the firm of Talbot & Hilliard did not render himself responsible to the creditors of that firm as a silent partner by estoppel, under the following circumstances: Defendant was an undertaker and had a great many carriages, and at all times one or more of these were under repair in the shop of Talbot & Hilliard who were carriage repairers. To keep an eye on this work, defendant was in the shop every day. I-Ie would give instructions to the workmen in reference to the work. He lent money to Talbot & Hilliard, and to reimburse himself accepted for collection accounts of theirs against their customers, and kept the money he thus collected. Haying furnished the funds for obtaining the delivery of certain expensive rubber tires, he was consulted as to the advisability of letting certain customers of the firm have these tires on a credit. The shop of Talbot & Hilliard having been closed by seizure, he opened a shop a few doors away and removed thither from the shop of Talbot & Hilliard his own repair work then on hand, and shortly thereafter received there the repair work that Talbot & Hilliard had had on hand for others. Some of the goods of Talbot & Hilliard, without his knowledge, were surreptitiously removed from the shop of Talbot & Hilliard during the seizure and taken to this new shop. He employed in this new shop some of the workmen from the shop of Talbot & Hilliard.</p> <p>2. Libel—Pbobable Cause eor Statements.</p> <p>The former bookkeeper of Talbot & Hilliard, and also one of the workmen of that firm, having stated the above facts to plaintiff’s counsel, together with others tending to show that a considerable portion of the stock of goods of Talbot & Hilliard had been surreptitiously conveyed to the shop of defendant, held, that in setting out the facts relied upon for contending that defendant was responsible as a silent partner by estoppel in the firm of Talbot &