Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 147 views

    Arnold Vs Patterson Digest

    Uploaded by

    oabeljeanmonique
    The document summarizes a legal case from March 17, 1923. It describes that plaintiff G.C. Arnold had originally entered into a 5-year contract with the firm Willits & Patterson to provide services in the Philippines. Willits & Patterson later organized two corporations, one in the Philippines and one in California, which took over the assets and business of the original firm. Arnold argues that a subsequent letter signed on behalf of the corporations ratified the original contract and bound the defendant corporation. The syllabus concisely summarizes that where a firm organizes a corporation that takes over its assets and business and deals with a party the same as the firm, the corporation is bound by contracts the firm previously entered into with that party

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    Arnold Vs Patterson Digest

    Uploaded by

    oabeljeanmonique
    147 views1 page
    The document summarizes a legal case from March 17, 1923. It describes that plaintiff G.C. Arnold had originally entered into a 5-year contract with the firm Willits & Patterson to provide services in the Philippines. Willits & Patterson later organized two corporations, one in the Philippines and one in California, which took over the assets and business of the original firm. Arnold argues that a subsequent letter signed on behalf of the corporations ratified the original contract and bound the defendant corporation. The syllabus concisely summarizes that where a firm organizes a corporation that takes over its assets and business and deals with a party the same as the firm, the corporation is bound by contracts the firm previously entered into with that party

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Arnold vs Patterson Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document summarizes a legal case from March 17, 1923. It describes that plaintiff G.C. Arnold had originally entered into a 5-year contract with the firm Willits & Patterson to provide services in the Philippines. Willits & Patterson later organized two corporations, one in the Philippines and one in California, which took over the assets and business of the original firm. Arnold argues that a subsequent letter signed on behalf of the corporations ratified the original contract and bound the defendant corporation. The syllabus concisely summarizes that where a firm organizes a corporation that takes over its assets and business and deals with a party the same as the firm, the corporation is bound by contracts the firm previously entered into with that party

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    147 views1 page

    Arnold Vs Patterson Digest

    Uploaded by

    oabeljeanmonique
    The document summarizes a legal case from March 17, 1923. It describes that plaintiff G.C. Arnold had originally entered into a 5-year contract with the firm Willits & Patterson to provide services in the Philippines. Willits & Patterson later organized two corporations, one in the Philippines and one in California, which took over the assets and business of the original firm. Arnold argues that a subsequent letter signed on behalf of the corporations ratified the original contract and bound the defendant corporation. The syllabus concisely summarizes that where a firm organizes a corporation that takes over its assets and business and deals with a party the same as the firm, the corporation is bound by contracts the firm previously entered into with that party

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    G.R. No.

    L-20214             March 17, 1923

    G. C. ARNOLD, plaintiff (Arnold)-appellant,


    vs.
    WILLITS & PATTERSON, LTD., defendant-appellee.

    Facts: That at the inception C.D. Willits and I. L. Patterson constituted the firm of Willits &
    Patterson doing business in the City of San Francisco; that later Patterson retired from the firm,
    and Willits acquired all of his interests and thereafter continued the business under the name and
    style of Willits & Patterson; that the original contract Exhibit A was made between the plaintiff
    (Arnold) and the old firm at San Francisco on July 31, 1916, to cover a period of five years from
    that date; that plaintiff (Arnold) entered upon the discharged of his duties and continued his
    services in the Philippine Islands to someone for the period of five years; that on November 10,
    1919, and as a result of conferences between Willits and the plaintiff (Arnold), Exhibit B was
    addressed and signed in the manner and form above stated in the City of Manila. A short time
    prior to that date Willits organized a corporation in San Francisco, in the State of California,
    which took over and acquired all of the assets of the firm's business in California then being
    conducted under the name and style of Willits & Patterson; that he subscribed for all of the
    capital stock of the corporation, and that in truth and in fact he was the owner of all of its capital
    stock. After this was done he caused a new corporation to be organized under the laws of the
    Philippine Islands with principal office at Manila, which took over and acquired all the business
    and assets of the firm of Willits & Patterson in the Philippine Islands, in and to which, in legal
    effect, he subscribed for all of its capital stock, and was the owner of all of its stock. After both
    corporations were organized the above letter was drafted and signed. The plaintiff (Arnold)
    contends that the signing of Exhibit B in the manner and under the conditions in which it was
    signed, and through the subsequent acts and conduct of the parties, was ratified and, in legal
    effect, became and is now binding upon the defendant.

    Syllabus:

    Where A entered upon the discharge of his duties under a contract with the firm of W & P, and the firm
    organized a corporation, which took over all of its assets and continued to conduct the business of the
    firm as a corporation and which dealt with and treated A as its agent, in the same manner as the firm
    had previously done, the corporation is bound by the contract which the firm made with A Arnold vs.
    Willits & Patterson, 44 Phil. 634, No. 20214 March 17, 1923

    Where A entered upon the discharge of his duties under a contract with the firm of W & P, and the firm
    organized a corporation, which took over all of its assets and continued to conduct the business of the
    firm as a corporation and which dealt with and treated A as its agent, in the same manner as the firm
    had previously done, the corporation is bound by the contract which the firm made with A Arnold vs.
    Willits & Patterson, 44 Phil. 634, No. 20214 March 17, 1923.

    You might also like