Case ID: scl_18/html/0133-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Beckham & Eckles v. John Peay.
    Although one partner may discharge a debt due to the firm by a third person, by discounting it against a debt due. by him individually to such person ; yet his agreement to discount will not charge the firm with the balance of his private debt remaining due after such discount, nor enable his individual creditor to discount that balance against another debt due by him to the firm, vide Hall et al ». Coe et al. 4M’C. 136.
    On the dissolution of a copartnership, one of the two copartners was authorized exclusively to collect the debts due to the firm: Held, that an acknowledgment by the other copartner, made after the dissolution, that a debt to the firm had been settled before the dissolution, by discounting it against a debt due by himself individually to the debtor of the firm, did not discharge such debtor.
   Per Curiam.

Confirming the instructions to the jury of Mr. Justice O’Neall, at Union, August Term, 1830.