Home >> Cyclopedia-of-law-vol-4 >> Acceptance Necessary To Complete to Partners Ex Emption >> Instances



INSTANCES. The acts, admissions and declarations of a partner dur ing the existence of a partnership, and while he is en gaged in business within the scope of the partnership, is evidence against the firm, but not to prove the ex istence of the partnership itself, or to deprive other partners of their interests in the firm property. (Natl. Bank. v. Conway, 67 Wis. 210; Williams v. Lewis, 115 Ind. 45.) Each partner has implied authority to employ the necessary servants and agents to transact the firm business. And when the partnership is appointed the agent of a person, the act of a single partner in the due execution of the agency binds the firm; the rule that an agent cannot delegate his authority does not apply to a partnership, as the partners are both agents and principals in transacting firm business. (Frost v. Erath Cattle Co., 8i Tex. 505; Deakin v. Underwood, 37 Minn. tot.) A partner has no implied authority to bind the firm by a submission to arbitration. (Gay v. Waltman, 89 Pa. St. 453•) Nor to make a general assignment for creditors. (Loeb v. Pierpont, 58 Ia. 469; Hill v. Post ley, 90 Va. 200.) And a partner's confession of judg ment will not bind his copartners. (J. Parsons Part., Sec. 122.) Each partner in a trading firm has authority to sign the name of the firm to negotiable paper. In signing negotiable paper the partner represents the firm and not the individuals, and binds them as members of the firm and not otherwise. So, in a trading firm the partners have each implied power to borrow on the credit of the firm for the firm, and issue firm notes, but in a non-trading firm they do not have this authority. (V‘Talsh v. Lennon, 98 Ill. 27; Levi v. Latham, 15 Neb. 5o9.) And partners have authority to compromise a debt of the firm, release a claim to the firm, and to pay firm debts. But a release of a claim without consid eration by a partner is void. (Beatson v. Harris, 6o N. H. 83.) A partner has implied power to sell any specific part of the partnership property which is held for the pur pose of sale, and this extends to choses in action, and he may warrant the title and quality. (Ellis v. Allen, 8o Ala. 515.) So he may buy goods intended for sale or use within the scope of the firm business. (Stillman v. Harvey, 47 Conn. 27; Johnston v. Trask, 116 N. Y. 136.) As a general rule the partner has no implied power to bind the firm by an instrument under seal, his power being limited to simple contracts. A partner ship has no seal, while a corporation has. But the firm may ratify such unauthorized act of a partner or give him special authority. (Russell v. Annable, 109 Mass. 72.) And if the partner has authority to do an act the seal may be treated as surplusage. (Edwards v. Dillon, 147 III. 14; J. Parsons Part., Secs. 117-118.) A partner may sue and defend suits in the firm name, but must indemnify the other partners if he acts with out their consent. He may employ counsel and enter the appearance of the firm. For damages accruing for illegal suits brought by a partner the firm is ordinarily liable. (Mechem on Part., Sec. 187; Harvey v. Adams, 32 Mich. 472.) A partner sued for a firm debt may offset a firm claim without his partner's permission. (J. Parsons, Part., Sec. 128.)

firm, partner, authority, partners and partnership