184 Ill. App. 66 | Ill. App. Ct. | 1913
delivered the opinion of the court.
From the evidence the trial court might properly find that the transactions between Thompson of the one part and Stewart and Marhoefer of the other part was not the lending of money hy the latter to the former, but was the purchase by each of an interest in the theatrical business conducted by Thompson under the name of the Thompson Opera Company, and that the parties had in contemplation the organization of a corporation, of which a specified amount of the capital stock should be issued to each of said parties and the remainder should be treasury stock. No corporation was ever organized and the parties to the contract from the time it was made must be held to have been partners. ' ¡
It is true that a person who enters into partnership with another does not thereby become liable to the creditors of his partner for anything done before he became a partner, yet there are exceptions to the rule. One is that where a contract made by a person or firm remains executory until a partnership is created or a new partner is admitted into the firm, and such contract, while it remains executory, is adopted by the incoming partner, who acquires all the benefit as if he had been a partner in the original transaction, a promise may be implied to assume the liability of the partner or firm on such contract. Frazer v. Howe, 106 Ill. 583; Lucas v. Coulter, 104 Ind. 81; Watt v. Kirby, 15 Ill. 200; Hellsby v. Mears, 5 B. & C. 504, 11 E. C. L. 539; Ex parte Peele, 6 Ves. Jr., 602-604.
In this case Stewart and Marhoefer knew that Thompson had made contracts with plaintiff and other players and knew that she and they were playing at the Angelus Theatre for the benefit of themselves and Thompson, and we think that the court might properly find that they became liable with Thompson to pay her for her services.
We think the record is free from error, and the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
