Court Opinion

ID: 9809273
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 21:06:35.451754+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:24:53.806506
License: Public Domain

Shepherd, J.
dissenting: The object of this action is to dissolve a co-partnership and to wind up its affairs, and it cannot be doubted that, for this purpose, it is brought in the proper county. Indeed, this is conceded, and I am unable to understand why the jurisdiction should be ousted because a part of the partnership assets is situated in another county. If this be the rule, it will be exceedingly difficult, in many cases, to-determine where such an action may be brought, as a co-partnership may have real assets in many 'different sections of the State. It will also be observed that a receiver is asked for, who, in the event of his appointment, may bring an action against Buxton in the county where the land is situated. His Honor, in his discretion, for the convenience of parties, witnesses, &c., might have ordered a removal, but I cannot agree that the statute required him to do so.