Case ID: tenn_7/html/0297-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Supreme Court of Errors and Appeals. Rogersville.
    1824.
    BLACKBURN v. Mc’CALLISTER.
    One partner cannot bind another by deed, unless by the terms of the partnership authorized to do so. [Ace. 1 Y. 26; 1 Hum. 119; 2 Hum. 531; 6 Hum. 261; 5 Hum. 37. But he may make an assignment under seal of the partnership effects, for the benefit of creditors.
    [' Lasell v. Tucker, 5 Sn. 33.]
   Debt upon a bond under seal, executed by Purdom, one of the partners of the firm of Mc’Callister and Purdom, on behalf of the firm.

Mc’Callister pleads specially that Purdom had executed the bond, and was not authorized as a partner, or otherwise, to bind the defendant, Mc’-Callister, by seal; therefore the writing was not his deed.

Replication ; that Purdom and Mc’Callister were partners in trade, and that Purdom, as partner, on account of the firm, had executed the bond, therefore it was the deed of Mc’Callister.

Demurrer. By the whole Court. The question has been often settled that one partner cannot bind another by deed, unless by the terms of the partnership authorized to do so.

Judgment affirmed.