Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Whitman Phillips, Respondent, v. Josiah G. Clark, Appellant, 1872 — 48 N.Y. 677 · caselaw · US
General
Whitman Phillips, Respondent, v. Josiah G. Clark, Appellant
48 N.Y. 677·New York Commission of Appeals·1872·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Whitman Phillips, Respondent, v. Josiah G. Clark, Appellant.
Plaintiff and one S. were partners. Upon dissolution they entered into a written agreement, by which S. assigned and- transferred all his rights and interest in the assets of the firm to plaintiff, who was to collect all the accounts, etc., and pay the firm debts, and with the share of S. in the residue, and the avails of certain individual .property also transferred ,to pay certain paper made in the firm name by S. for his individual benefit; the balance, if any remained, to be paid to S. In an action brought by plaintiff to recover a debt due the firm,—Held, that S. was not a necessary party plaintiff.
(Submitted September 30, 1871;
decided January term, 1872.)
J. F. Malcolm for the appellant.
Whiibeck c& Wcmdall for the respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Earl, C., reads for affirmance.
All concur. Judgment affirmed, with costs.