Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1896-11-19
JUSTIS AND DAVIDSON CASE.
Chancellor Nicholson Grants Preliminary
Injunction to the complainant.

Chancellor Nicholson Grants n Preliminary
Injunction to the complainant.
The Justis Il Davidson case, in which
George Justis alleges fraud upon the
part Of his former partner, Joseph
Davidson, was before Chancellor Nichol-
son yesterday. 1t is the case Of George
Justis vs.. Joseph Davidson and Paul
Gillis, sheriff, and Yesterdays hearing
was on rule TO show cause why an
injunction should not be granted to
prevent the collection of certain bonds
given by Mr.. ustis to Mr.. Davidson
in the settlement Of tho partnership.
William S. Hilles and Walter II. Hayes
appeared for the complainant and Ben
iamin Nields and John p. Nields for
I Davidson.
B The bill of complaint was filed Octo-
Der 2lst and rule was issued to the
defendants requiring them to. appear
and show cause why preliminary in
junction should not issue.
The bill recites the history of the
partnership formed in 1884, and con-
tinued until February 10Th, 1896, when
it was dissolved. Davidson is alleged
to have had sole charge of the money
and financial affairs. of the business.
At the time Of the dissolution a
verbal agreement was made. It was
found that the stock of the clothing
establishment was worth S24, 47S. 1t
was ascertained that each partner was
entitled to receive So, TIL as his share
Of the stock, wares and merchandise.
Or outstanding bills either was to col
ect the amounts and divide with the
other. The entire indebtedness Of
50, S32 was assumed by Mr.. Justis; Mr..
Davidson's share of one-half was de-
Quoted from his share of the stock,
&C., and for the difference of 1881,
Mr.. Justis gave his bond for so, 1852 to
secure the amount, with interest, to
Mr.. Davidson. This was done March
3D. 1885, With the bond was a war
rant of attorney authorizing the entry
OF judgment thereon by Mr.. Davidson.
Mr.. JustIs also gave bond for SO. O34.
Both bonds were due on the following
day. The last bond was for indebted
ness alleged by Mr.. Davidson to be due
from Mr.. Justis to him TO the amount
Of SLOT for money drawn out of the
CO. partnership by Mr.. Justis in excess
of his proper share.
Tho bill further alleges that on Octo-
Der. 18th, 1896, at 10 o clock in the even
ing, Davidson caused Judgment to be
enrsred on the first bond. and at 10. 05
O'Clock on the second bond. Two writs
OF execution were Issued to Sheriff
Gillisand Mr.. Justis wants the sheriff
restrained from levying upon his
property in pursuance of them.
Phen the bill goes on to say that the
orator, Mr.. Justis, had mado frequent
requests Of Mr.. Davidson for written
statement of, the financa! condition of
tho business, but Davidson refused.
After the dissolution Mr.. Justis began
to find out something about the ac-
counts. According to the bill he began
an examination Of the accounts which
had been kept by Davidson and ascer-
tanned that Davidson had .'applied to
his own use from the receipts and
profits of said business very large sums
of money, greatly exceeding the pro-
portion thereof to which he was en-
titled" Mr.. Justis alleges that David
son took out more than he was eniilled
to and more than the amount for
which Justis gave the two judgment
bonds; that Davidson was indebted to
tho partnership in very large
amount OF money, exceeding, as Mr..
Justis believes, $50, 900, one. half of
which is uue from Davidson to JuHtis.
Mr.. Justis therefore alleges false
Misrepresentation by Davidson. He
asks for an injunction to restrain the
defendants from the collection of the
judgments he had given; that they be
declared fraudulent and void, and that
an accounting may be had Of the
partnership, and that what would APP
pear thereby to be due from Davidson
to him might be decreed and ordered
paid.
Tho answer filed in behalf of David
son denies the allegations in the bill.
After argument by the attorneys the
Chancellcr granted a preliminary in
junction,