Sec. XVI. A limited or special partnership does not exist in the common law. It is borrowed from the Code Napoleon, and wherever it exists in this country it is owing to some statutes. In this State find the rules governing it in N. Y. Revised Statutes. An important remark in regard to such partnerships is: if the statutes are departed from in creating the partnership the special partner becomes a general partner on the ground that the limited partnership is but an exception to a general rule and that it is necessary to comply with the exception to withdraw the case from the general rule. The leading case is Argell vs. Smith, 3 Denio, 435, same principle applied to failure to pay in cash. 69 N. Y., 148, NOTES IN EQUITY. PROFESSOR LEE. Officially Revised. BISPHAM'S PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY. The figures preceding the notes refer to the page and section in connection with which the note is given. All references to the New York Revised Statutes are made to the star paging except when otherwise specified. 231 § 177. Code Civ. Pro., §§ 19171918. 234, § 179. Penalty and Liquidated Damages. Wallis vs. Smith. L. R., 21 Ch. Div., 243; Little vs. Banks, 85 N. Y., 258; Kent vs. Ice Co., 69 N. Y., 45; Colwell vs. Lawrence, 38 N. Y., 71; Cotheal vs. Talmage, 9 N. Y., 551. 236, N. 2, § 180. Statement is not true unless mortgage debt carries interest. 241, § 187. Mistakes of Law. Leading case is Hunt vs. Rousmaniere, 8 Wheaton, 174; 1 Pet., I, 13, 14. See also Doll vs. Earl, 69 Barb., 298, affirmed 59 N. Y., 638; Jacobs vs. Morange, 47 N. Y., 57 ; Lanning vs. Carpenter, 48 N. Y., 408; Weed vs. Weed, 94 N. Y., 243. 242, § 188. Read and compare Wheeler vs. Smith, 9 Howard 55, with Hunt vs. Rousmaniere, supra. 244, § 190. Mistakes of Fact. Meyer vs. The Mayor, etc., 63 N. Y., 445; Southwick vs. First Nat. Bank, 84 N. Y., 420; Maher vs. Hibernia Ins. Co., 67 N. Y., 283; Pitcher vs. Hennesey, 48 N. Y., 415. 249, N. 2, § 193. But see 1 R. S., 736, § 116, and also 1 R. S., 732, et seq. 1 R. S., 730, § 66. 348, § 278. 354, § 284. New York Rubber Co. vs. Rothery, 107 N. Y., 310. 360, § 294. Assignments of Mortgages. Estoppel. Union Dime Savings Inst. vs. Wilmot, 94 N. Y., 221. 374, § 312. Delafield vs. Barlow, 107 N. Y., 535; Morse vs. Morse, 85 N. Y., 53; Miller vs. Wright, 109 N. Y., 194. 382, § 323. Armstrong vs. McKelvey, 104 N. Y., 179. 390, N. 2, § 329. See Johnson vs. Harvey, 84 N. Y., 363. 407, § 334. Compare U. S. cases cited in notes to pp. 406, 407, 408, with the following N. Y. cases; Metropolitan Trust Co. vs. Tonawanda R. R. Co., 103 N. Y., 245; Raht vs. Atrill, 106 N. Y., 423; Vilas vs. Page, 106 N. Y., 439. 409, § 346. As to the order in which assets are liable for debts, see Willard's Equity Jurisprudence, p. 564 [739], and as to the order of payments of debts, 2 R. S., 87, § 27, 417, 356. Moyer vs. Hinman, 13 N. Y., 180; Cook vs. Banker, 50 N. Y., 655; Trenton Banking Co. vs. Duncan, 86 N. Y., 221. 418, N. 7, § 356. Vendee's Lien. Rose vs. Watson, 10 H. of L. 672, and cases cited in note 7. See also Chase vs. Peck, 21 N. Y., 589. 420, 358. § Chattel Mortgages, R. S., 7th Ed., p. 2249; Railroad Mortgages on Realty and Personalty, Laws of 1868, Chap. 779, R. S., 7th Ed., p. 1590. 432, § 368. In regard to when equity will decree specific performance of contracts relating to personalty. Johnston vs. Brooks, 93 N. Y., 337. 438, § 376. Trustees of Columbia College vs. Thatcher, 87 N. Y., 310. This case gives an instance of when specific performance will not be granted 441, § 378. Judicial sale-Motion to compel completion of purchase-Purchaser released, Jordan vs. Poillon, 77 N. Y., 518; Rice vs. Barrett, 99 N. Y., 403; Fleming vs. Burnham, 100 N. Y., Purchaser compelled to take. Matter of Dolan, 88 N. Y. 309; Rice vs. Barrett, 102 N. Y. 161. Suit for specific performance of contract to purchase. Purchaser compelled to take, Hellreigel vs. Manning, 97 N. Y., 56. I. 453, 392. Jenkins vs. Fahey, 73 N. Y. 355. § 455, 398. See also Willard's Equity Jurisprudence, 278 (343). 467, § 409. Erie Railway Co. vs. Ram sey, 45 N. Y., 637. 470, § 413. The exception to the rule stated in the text, in the case of a mortgagee, does not exist in N. Y. See Code of Civ. Pro., § 1628-1629. 471, § 415. In regard to bills of peace. N. Y. & New Haven R. R. Co. vs. Schuyler, 17 N. Y., 592–608. 472, 416. Third Ave. R. R Co. vs. The Mayor, etc., 54 N. Y., 159. 474, § 418. 1525. trademarks are regulated by the U. S. statutes as follows: Patents U. S. R. S., §§ 4883-4936; trademarks, §§ 4937-4947; copyrights, §§ 49484971. The law in regard to trade-marks was declared by the Supreme Court in 100 U. S., 82, to be unconstitutional. Congress, therefore, on March 3, 1881, passed a law meeting the objections of the Supreme Court; see 21 U. S. Statutes at Large, 502. 503, N. 2, § 547. U. S. R. S., § 4921; see also the leading case of Root vs. R. R., 105 U. S., 189. 503, § 448. For Text-books on Patents 474, 419. Interpleader by defendant against whom action is pending. Code of Civ. Pro. & 820. 478, § 423. The Bankrupt Act was repealed June 7th, 1878, to take effect September 1st, 1878, but not to affect pending cases. 20 U. S. Statutes at Large, 99. 480, $424. See Erie R. R. Co. vs. Ramsey, 45 N. Y., 637. 481, 424. Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. vs. Supervisors of N. Y., 3 Abb. Dec. 344. An action for an injunction will not lie to restrain the collection of a tax upon an illegal assessment where there is a remedy to review and correct the assessment by certiorari or to strike it from the roll by mandamus. 482, N. 1, § 425. Repeat note to § 413. 488, § 423. Action for Waste. Code Civ. Pro., §§ 1651-1659, 968, 982. 494, § 439. Action for Nuisance. Code of Civ. Pro., §§ 968, 982, 1660-1663. 498, § 441. As to who would be responsible in case of a nuisance; Vogel vs. The Mayor, etc., 92 N. Y., 10. 501, § 443. Purpresture; People vs. Horton, 64 N. Y., 610. 502, 444. Patents, copyrights and 505, § 449. The statement in the text that in this country in a patent case, an account may be granted, although the injunction is refused, because the patent has expired, is not true, except under special circumstances; see Root vs. R. R. Co., 105 U. S., 189. To get a thorough understanding of the matter, the case of Beedle vs. Bennett, 122 U. S., 71, should be read also. 506, § 451. U. S. R. S., §§ 4948-4971, supersede sections mentioned in the text 507, N. 4, § 453. But see cases in note in text on pp. 519-521. 508, N. 3, § 455. Lectures. Caird vs. Sime L. R., 12 Ap. Cas. H. L., 326. 509, § 456. U. S. Trade mark Law, March 3d, 1881, 21 U. S. Stat. at Large, 502; Trademark Cases. Hier vs. Abrahams, 82 N. Y., 519; Fetridge vs. Wells, 13 How. Pr. 385; Wolfe vs. Burke, 56 N. Y., 122 Hennessy vs. Wheeler, 69 N. Y., 271; Van Beil vs. Prescott, 82 N. Y., 630; Amoskeag Man. Co. vs. Trainer, 101 U. S., 51; Royal Baking Powder Co. vs. Sher rill, 93 N. Y., 331; Man. Co. vs. Hall, 61 N. Y., 226; Selchow vs. Baker, 93 N. Y., 59; Celluloid Man. Co. vs. Cellonite Man. Co., 32 Fed. Rep., 94. As to use of one's own name, Meneely vs. Meneely, 62 N. Y., 427; Devlin vs. Devlin, 69 N. Y., 212. Unreasonable delay-what relief awarded, McLean vs. Fleming, 96 U. S., 245. 515, N. 1, § 461. Injunctions in case of a negative covenant. Trustees of Columbia College vs. Thatcher, 87 N. Y., 311. 523, § 469. Y., 377. See Clute vs. Knies, 102 N. 532, § 479. Action of account. Code of Civ. Pro., §§ 386, 531, 803-809, 867, 1013. 538, 487. Partition. Now regulated by Code Civ. Pro. §§. 263, 340, 473, 982, 1532, 1595, 1625, 1656-1658, 1676, 3252 3254, 3299. 545, 495. Action for Dower. Code of Civ. Pro., §§ 263, 340, 616, 791, 968, 982, 1499, 1538, 1539, 1553, 1567-71, 158385, 1596-1625. 562,512. Partnership Real Estate. See Fairchild vs. Fairchild, 64 N. Y., 471; and Collumb vs. Read, 24 N. Y., 505. 564, § 515. Saunders vs. Reilly, 105 N. Y., 12; Fitzpatrick vs. Flanagan, 106 U. S., 648; Case vs. Beauregard, 99 U. S., 582, 535. Statutory order for the payment of debts of decedents. 2 R. S., 87, § 27. 588, § 541. Wilcox vs. Wilcox, 14 N. Y. 575; Anderson vs. Mather, 44 N. Y., 160; Matter of Welch, 74 N. Y., 299. See also Code Civ. Pro., § 2472; 7th Ed. R. S., 2162, 2292, 2301, 2346-2347. 590, § 542. Matter of Hynes, 105 N. Y. 560. 1 R. S., 718, § 5. 590, § 543. Ward of Court. Civ. Pro., § 2360. Code of 594, 549. Rights of the Guardian. § Matter of Hynes, 105 N. Y., 560. Sale, mortgage or lease of infants', idiots' and drunkards' real estate. Code of Civ. Pro, § 2348, etc. 595, § 551. General jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over persons and property of idiots, lunatics and drunkards. Code of Civ. Pro., § 2320. Proceedings for the appointment of a committee, §§ 2320 § 610, 571. 1638, etc. 611, 573. § testimony. 612, § 574. peach a will. See Code of Civ. Pro., § Proceedings to perpetuate Code of Civ. Pro, § 871, etc. Action to establish or imCode of Civ. Pro., § 1861, etc. 612, § 575. Bills to remove a cloud from a title. Chase vs. Chase, 95 N. Y., 373. 614, § 576. Appointment of Receivers ; Code of Civ. Pro., § 713, etc., 1947, 1877. 615, 578. Receivers in case of Creditors' Bills; Code of Civ. Pro., § 1877. 618, § 581. Writs of ne exeat are now abolished and orders of arrest substituted; Code of Civ. Pro., § 548-551. (End of Notes on Bispham's Principles of Equity.) BOOK REVIEWS. THE STUDENTS LAW LEXICON. A dictionary of legal words and phrases by William C. Cochran, of the Cincinnati bar. Robert Clarke & Co., Cincinnati, 1888. In the shape of a single, small and convenient sized volume, Mr. Cochran has prepared a law lexicon that will be found very valuable for handy reference. The law lexicon is before all things a student's book, and the student who can not invest in an expensive dictionary as Bouvier will find this volume a most valuable substitute. The value of such a reference book lies in its constant use, and in many cases the student will find himself informing himself in such a volume, when, were he required to search a cumbersome dictionary he would remain uninformed. While the work is not by any means exhaustive, its scope is only limited by its size, and its contents are selected with special reference to actual wants. There are two valuable appendices, one giving the abbreviations of reports; the other gives the Latin and French maxims of the common law, together with translations and explanations. This book will be a useful one for the lawyer's desk, and should not be wanting at the student's table. preface, in 1860 the law of companies was just being developed, principally by legislative enactment, out of the law of partnership, and it therefore then appeared desirable to treat the two together. Since that time, however, the law of companies has increased so rapidly that it now both justifies and requires consideration in a separate treatise. Therefore this new edition contains a treatise on the Law of Partnership proper and on the Law of Companies so far only as it is connected with the former subject. This work, as soon as it was published, assumed almost instantly the position of a standard authority. The extensive acquaintance with the common law on this subject, the carefulness of statement, and the conservative, well-balanced and eminently judicial mind of its author combined to give the statements of the text the greatest possible weight in aiding the judiciary in settling this branch of the law. When the original treatise was published the Law of Partnership was in a State of great fluctuation, owing to the conflict between the old ideas and principles bedded in the common law and the modern tendencies formulated in the statutory provisions on this and its kindred and connected subjects. This book and the subsequent acts of its author both as a judge and as the framer of some of the most important provisions of the Parliamentary legislation on the Law of Companies, have done more to put an end to this State of change and fluctuation than the efforts of any other one man. We notice incidently that Lord LINDLEY ON PARTNERSHIP. Published by Frederick D. Linn & Co., Jersey City, N. J, 1888. Printed from advance sheets of the fifth English edition, with American notes by Stewart Rapalje. This work at present contains only a portion of the original "Treatise on the Law of Partnership, including its application to companies," published in 1860. As Lord Justice Lindley explains in his Justice Lindley evidently is a believer in |