| Volume 200, Volume 3, Page 88 View pdf image (33K) |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
88 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY. received, as appears in the same way, $2,394 31, and in order to place him on an equality with the defendant it was neces- sary he. should receive the farther sum of $7,705 70. The settlement, after providing for the payment of the debts of the partnership, and the interest on the capital contributed by the partners, contains this language; "This done, he" (the defen- dant who was made the liquidating partner) " shall from time to time, as assets may be received, pay to Alonzo Lilly $7,705 70, or thereabouts, exclusive of the $2,894 31, now at his debit, to place him on an equal footing with Josiah Kroesen, as re- gards his account of $5,050, leger A, folio 6, for expenses, &c., and the residue of the surplus (if any) to be divided from time to time, say two-thirds to Alonzo Lilly, and one-third to Josiah Kroesen; so that in the end, Lilly shall have received two-thirds, and Josiah Kroesen one-third of the net profits of the business of Josiah Kroesen & Co., from the 1st day of February, 1836, to the 1st day of January, 1889. All sums paid to either party shall, at the time of payment, be charged to their respective accounts, and no interest to be allowed or paid by or to either party from this date." The state of the accounts between the parties was this: each had received back his capital and the interest upon it, and the debts having been paid, it was supposed the net surplus or profits would be about $16,000,. the apparent surplus being a little upwards of $20,000. There stood charged to the defendant upon the books $5,050, and to the plaintiff $2,394 31, so that in order to put the latter upon an equality with the former, relation being had to the interest of each in the concern, it was neces- sary that he should receive from collections, as they might be made, the further sum of $7,705 70, before the defendant re- ceived anything more, and such is the stipulation of the con- tract. 'It was manifestly the expectation of the parties that the assets would not only be adequate to accomplish this, but that there would be a still further surplus for division, for the contract further provides for the division of such further sur- plus. It has turned out, however, that the collections from the as- |
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
| Volume 200, Volume 3, Page 88 View pdf image (33K) |
|
Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!
|
An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact
mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.
Maryland State Archives