Kipp v. McChesney
Citations
- 66 Ill. 460
Syllabus
<p>1. Extinguishment ob payment, by operation' of km—purchase of firm note by a partner. Where the note of an unincorporated company was by the payee indorsed to one of the partners composing the company, and by him to the plaintiff, it was insisted that the transfer to one of the makers operated in law as a payment or extinguishment of the note, and consequently that the latter could not transfer to the plaintiff any right of action: Held, that the case turned upon the question whether there was a payment in fact, or a purchase, and that it could not be adjudged a payment or extinguishment if it were not so intended at the time.</p> <p>2. Pabtxebship—pm’tner'may purchase obligations on his firm. One partner may invest his private means in the purchase of partnership securities, and hold them as valid obligations; and the fact that such partner can not enforce such obligations against his firm in a court of law, for the reason that he can not be both plaintiff and defendant, is a difficulty-affecting the remedy only, and not the right; and when he indorses such negotiable securities to a third person not subject to such exception, the difficulty, even as to the remedy, ceases, and such person may maintain an action on the same.</p>
Judges: Sheldon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.