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.
Hamlin Babcock, Respondent, v. William L. Hermance, Appellant, 1872 — 48 N.Y. 683 · caselaw · US
General
Hamlin Babcock, Respondent, v. William L. Hermance, Appellant
48 N.Y. 683·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
Hamlin Babcock, Respondent, v. William L. Hermance, Appellant.
(Argued January 5, 1872;
decided May term, 1872.)
Action for dissolution of a co-partnership and an accounting (decided principally upon the facts.)
The complaint alleged that the defendant abandoned the co-partnership business, and that thereby the co-partnership was dissolved as to the further prosecution of the business. Defendant claimed that complaint showed a dissolution before the commencement of the action, and that a decree dissolving it was error. Held, that, conceding defendant’s construction of complaint, this action was an appropriate remedy for a final adjustment of the partnership concerns; that the clause in the decree dissolving, could by no possibility harm defendant, and was no ground for reversal.
Sidney <6 Ha/rris for the appellant.
Addison Brown for the respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Gray, 0., reads for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.