First National Bank v. Gitt & Delone

Citations

• 259 Pa. 84
• 102 A. 428
• 1917 Pa. LEXIS 521

Syllabus

<p>Partnerships — Existence of partnership — Evidence—Insufficiency —Going business — Assignment to alleged partners — Status of Assignees — Trustees—Assignment for creditors — Accounting—Commissions — Tenants in common — Sharing of profits — Promissory notes — Nonsuit.</p> <p>1. A division of the product of property between tenants in common does not make them partners, although they may have contributed labor or money to raise it.</p> <p>2. In an action on promissory notes against two defendants as copartners it appeared that the owner of a going business entered into a written agreement with the defendants under which he turned over his entire estate to them for the purpose of administration ; that they were to convert the property into cash and apply the proceeds first to the payment of the claims of creditors, then to the payment of an annuity to the assignor, then to other purposes specified; and that defendants were to retain for themselves the residue which might he left after such payments had been made. It did not appear that any profits were made, or that the business was carried on for that purpose or that there was any understanding between the defendants as to the sharing of profits, or that they held themselves out as partners to the plaintiff. . The notes in question were given by one defendant and represented an old indebtedness of the assignor’s business, such defendant endorsing the notes in the business name and individually. The other defendant had nothing to do with the negotiation of the notes. Held, the defendants were not partners hut trustees, and á compulsory nonsuit was properly entered as to the defendant who' did not endorse the note.</p> <p>3. The transaction was in the nature of an assignment for the benefit of creditors, involving an accounting; the residue representing commissions of the assignees.</p>