203 N.W. 988 | Minn. | 1925
1. It is plain that the parties never intended to submit to arbitration anything but the matter of an accounting as to the affairs of the copartnership. When the arbitrators undertook to make an award for wages they exceeded the scope of their inquiry.
2. This was a common law arbitration. The parties were entitled to be heard in the presence of each other; and, for such purpose, were entitled to notice of time and place of hearing. Such arbitration and statutory arbitration are distinguished in Holdridge v. Stowell,
It is unnecessary to consider other questions argued.
Affirmed.