The case involved a dispute between former law partners Andrew W. Metcalfe and William P. Bradshaw over whether Bradshaw owed Metcalfe a share of commissions earned as executor of certain estates during their partnership. The partnership was formed in 1874 with specific profit-sharing terms and dissolved in 1885 without a formal accounting. Metcalfe filed a bill in chancery seeking an accounting limited to those commissions from the Bennett, Emmett, and Neudecker estates. The court decided that the commissions were not partnership profits, as the executorships did not compete with the firm's business or use its resources and occurred with Metcalfe's involvement or consent in some instances. Therefore, the bill was dismissed for want of equity, and the dismissal was affirmed on appeal.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved members of the Chicago Law Stenographic Association suing fellow members for allegedly violating the group's rules by charging below the fixed schedule of prices for stenographic services. The court affirmed the lower court's decision sustaining a demurrer to the declaration, holding that the association's constitution and bylaws created an unenforceable contract. The core reasoning was that the agreement's primary purpose was to restrain competition and control prices among members, rendering it void as contrary to public policy under common-law principles prohibiting combinations that diminish competition or regulate prices for services, even when membership was not universal in the local market.

business & regulatory