
    Case 25 — PETITION ORDINARY —
    January 7.
    Montague v. J. & C. Reakert.
    APPEAL EROM OWEN CIRCUIT COURT.
    
      One pa/i'tner has no authoi'ity to hind his co-partner after dissolution and notice thereof, by a note in the firm name, even though executed for a firm debt.
    T. N. & D. W. Lindsey,......Lor Appellant.
    (Brief misplaced.)
   JUDGE ROBERTSON

delivered the opinion oe the court.

After the dissolution, and notice of it to the appellees, Parker had no authority to bind his former co-partner Montague by the note in the firm name, even though executed for a firm debt. The law implies in such a case no authority, and the testimony clearly negatives any express authority; consequently the verdict and judgment against Montague were unauthorized and erroneous, and the court ought to have sustained the motion for a new trial. This opinion may not affect Montague’s pre-existing liability on the open account.

Wherefore the judgment is reversed, and tbe cause remanded for a new trial.  