Grigsby v. Day

Citations

• 9 S.D. 585
• 70 N.W. 881
• 1897 S.D. LEXIS 120

Syllabus

<p>1. Defendant authorized plaintiff to solicit loans for him, the commissions being divided between them, and a second mortgage to defendant being taken to secure such commissions. Each application for a loan, when accepted by defendant, was returned with a separate letter of instructions, and the sum necessary to make the loan; and when it was made all papers were sent to defendant. The parties lived in different states, had no partnership name, and each carried on other business. Held, that, as between themselves, there was no partnership.</p> <p>2. It was agreed that plaintiff should look up farm lands for defendant to purchase, and that on a sale of the lands by defendant the profits should be equally divided. Plaintiff had no authority to contract for either pur chase or sale. The parties lived in different states, had no partnership name, and each carried on other business. Held, that, as between themselves, there was no partnership.</p> <p>3. Where one owning a half interest in notes and mortgages taken in his name assigns his property, including such notes and mortgages, for the benefit of creditors, his co-owner may sue him for conversion thereof, and need not resort to the assignee or the property.</p> <p>4. The face value of notes and mortgages is presumed to be their real value in an action for their conversion, under Comp. Laws, Sec. 4615, providing that for the purpose of estimating damages the value of an instrument in writing is presumed to be equal to that of the property to which it entitles its owner.</p>