#### Peterson & Kimball Company, Defendant in Error, v. William A. Thompson et al., Defendants. Edward H. Marhoefer, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 19,074.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John D. Tuknbaugh, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed May 12, 1915.

Rehearing denied June 1, 1915.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Peterson & Kimball Company, a corporation, plaintiff, against William A. Thompson, Edward H. Marhoefer and Wellington T. Stewart, defendants, to recover $199.55 on an account stated. Service was had npon Thompson who defaulted and judgment was. rendered against him for the amount claimed. Thereafter scire facias was issued and served upon the other defendants and a trial resulted in a finding and judgment against them.. A writ of error was sued out to reverse said judgment and a brief and argument were filed by defendant Marhoefer.

The evidence shows that in July and August, 1911, defendant Thompson was engaged in the theatrical business in the city of Chicago, doing business as the Thompson Opera Company. Defendant Stewart became associated with him in the business on or about •August 1, 1911, at which time some preliminary steps were taken for the organization of a corporation to be known as the “Col. W. A. Thompson Co., Inc.” The organization of this corporation was never completed. On September 1, 1911, defendant Marhoefer was induced to take an interest in the business, and Thompspn, Stewart and Marhoefer then entered into a written contract by which Thompson became president and manager.

*590Abstract of the Decision.

1. Corporations, § 28 * —when members liable as partners. A company which is not a corporate body is a partnership, composed not merely of the directors, but of all the subscribers to the articles of association.

2. Partnership, § 269*—when partner liable for act prior to membership ratified thereafter. Even though an order for goods was given before a person became a member of a partnership Where, after he became such, the partner ordering the goods agreed that the items of the account were correct and impliedly agreed to pay therefor, such subsequent partner becomes liable thereon.

On August 29th, preceding, Thompson gave to plaintiff an order to print certain programs, slips, cuts, etc., for use in the business of the company, which order was filled and delivered by plaintiff on September 5th, and further orders for like work were filled and delivered by plaintiff on September 9th, 18th, 23rd and 30th. The total amount of the bill for said work was $199.55, and upon the presentation of said bill to Thompson, he made an indorsement thereon, as follows: “O. K. Col. W. A. Thompson Co. (Not inc.) by W. A. Thompson, Mgr.” This constituted the account stated which is sued upon.

Bunge, Harbour & Chadwick, for plaintiff in error.

William M. Lawton, for defendant in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Presiding Justice Baume

delivered the opinion of the court.