Legal Subject: Society |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cunninghames v. Dougal | 1775 | Society, Partnership, Debt, Bankruptcy, Succession, Creditor | Desiring to engage in the Maryland tobacco trade, several merchants formed a partnership known as Alexander Cunninghame and Company. These merchants included Alexander Cunninghame, the firm’s managing partner, and James Dougal, the eventual pursuer in this case. After Cunninghame died in December of 1772, a dispute arose over the appropriate treatment of his shares under the partnership agreement. Cunninghame’s heirs (defenders Elizabeth and Barbara Cunninghame) sought to withdraw his shares based on the firm’s most recent balance, which had been completed in July of 1772. However, James Dougal claimed that the heirs were only entitled to any proceeds available after discharge of the firm’s debts. Two factual circumstances colored the parties’ arguments. First, one of the firm’s tobacco stores had been destroyed by fire in April of 1772, but the loss was not included in the July balance. Second, also in 1772, the firm’s factors in America purchased tobacco at a price that could not be recovered in the European market, resulting in a substantial loss. Case documents include correspondence between the firm’s Glasgow partners and its factors in America. (The firm continued under the management of Alexander’s brother William Cunninghame, and after assuming Robert Findlay as a new partner, took the name of Cunninghame Findlay and Company. It went on to became a significant player in the tobacco trade.) |
Documents discussing this subject (14)
- APPENDIX. No. I. DEFENDERS' PROOF.
- Bakers of Paisley v. Stent-Masters of Paisley — Minute, 16 Jun 1836
- Hugh Knox v. Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow — Answers, 27 Nov 1798
- Hugh Macmorran and Company, and the Trustees for their Creditors v. Newcastle-upon-Tyne Fire Office — State of the Process, 14 Nov 1809
- INFORMATION FOR ADAM VALLANCE Deacon, and CHARLES MURRAY Box-Master of the Incorporation of Barbers in the Canongate for themselves, and the other Barbers, Members of said Corporat
- James Kippen, Andrew Anderson Junior, Agnew Crawford, John Rodger, Gabriel James Weir and John M'Nair v. Nathan Wilson, George Robertson, Robert Ewing, James Hunter, William Macdowal and Alexander Wood — Answers, 8 Jun 1821
- John Bain, Treasurer to the Bakers' Society of Paisley, and Others, Members thereof against Walter M'Farlane, Collector of the Poor's Rate for the Burgh of Paisley, Walter Symington, Merchant there, and Others, Stent-Mast… — Revised Case, 14 Jan 1836
- John Graham and Others v. William Clark and Others — Summons, 16 May 1818
- LC Volume 06 — Petition, 11 Feb 1819
- LC Volume 06 — Petition, 11 Jan 1819 [2]
- Montgomery — Information, 6 Sep 1792
- RECORD, CONSISTING OF RE-REVISED REASONS OF ADVOCATION, AND NOTE OF PLEAS IN LAW, FOR PETER GILLIES, Smith in Partick, Preses, and James Miller, Mason there, Treasurer of the Parti
- Society of Advocates in Aberdeen v. Roderick Gray and Others — Answers, 7 Jan 1841
- William Kerr v. James Marshall — Answers, 21 Jun 1815 [2]