For appellants, it was argued that general reputation was not admissible as evidence of a partnership; or, if admissible, not sufficient. (Collyer on Partnership, sec. 777, p. 676; 20 Wend. 81; 3 Hill, Smith v. Griffith.)
The admission of the contents of letters, to prove a partnership against J. C. Wood, which were not shown to be his, but only said to be, was error.
The admission of illegal testimony, in the least degree bearing upon the merits of the case, if objected to, is error. (1 Comst. 521.)
There is no brief for respondents on file.
JUDGES: Heydenfeldt, Justice, delivered the opinion of the Court. Wells, Justice, concurred.
OPINION
HEYDENFELDT, Judge
Evidence was allowed on the trial to prove a partnership by general reputation.
The contents of letters were also permitted to be given in evidence, without proving that they were written by the party who was to be charged by their contents.
These errors are so manifest, that their statement alone is sufficient to show that the judgment in this cause must be reversed, and the cause remanded.
Ordered accordingly.