•  
  •  
 

Abstract

The recent case of Chisholm v. Gilmer, in holding joint adventurers jointly liable on an obligation incurred by all the members thereof through a trustee who acted as agent for all the members, again opened up the problem of the nature of the joint adventure and the rights and liabilities of its members. When, in joint adventure cases, the relationship of the parties is not clearly determined by their contract, the courts have consistently looked to the law of partnership for aid in reaching a result. It is the purpose of this article to indicate the degree to which this reliance on partnership law has gone.

Share

COinS