LEGAL PHASES OF COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATIONS. 59 
a vote to incur further expenses for an exhibition with premiums, or as assented 
to be bound by such vote, would be bound thereby. 
In other words, only those members were lable who authorized 
the exhibition with premiums or who later ratified the act of hold- 
ing such an exhibition. The other members were not liable. 
In a Michigan case ** the members of a building committee of an 
unincorporated religious society ordered lumber of a lumber dealer 
for the building of a church. A dispute arose, and the lumber dealer 
brought suit against the members of the building committee and 
won. In holding the defendants hable, the court said: 
The church organization had no legal existence—it could neither sue nor be 
sued. The members of the society were not partners. Those of the society .who 
were actually instrumental in incurring the liabilities for it are liable as either 
principals or agents having no legal principal behind them. Members of the 
society who either authorized or ratified the transaction are liable, while 
those who did not are exempt from liability. 
All the authorities apparently agree that if the debt or obligation 
in question was necessarily incurred for the express purpose for 
which the association was formed each member thereof is hable. In 
a South Dakota case 7 the following language was used with refer- 
ence to this matter: 
Bach member of an unincorporated or voluntary association is liable for the 
debts thereof incurred during his period of membership and which had been 
necessarily contracted for the purpose of carrying out the objects for which 
the association was formed. 
Where an unincorporated association is organized and operated for 
profit the members are generally held liable as partners to third 
persons. This obligation is imposed by law on the members of such 
an association, and it is immaterial what the rules of the association 
provide on the subject of liability.*° In a California case ** suit was 
brought by the plaintiff against the defendant association, which 
was unincorporated, and certain of its members to recover the sale 
price of goods purchased by the association for use in its business. 
The association was composed of 19 members. The defendant recoy- 
ered an individual judgment against two of the members of the 
association, and they appealed on the ground that they could not be 
held individually responsible for the claim of the plaintiff. In af- 
firming the judgment of the lower court the Court of Appeals of 
California said that the case came within the rule announced in 
volume 5, Corpus Juris, 1362, 1373, as follows: 
7 Clark v. O’Rourke, 111 Mich. 108, 69 N. W. 147, 66 Amer. St. Rep. 389. 
Lynn v. Commercial Club of Witten, 41 S. D. 401, 141 N. W. 471; see also Little 
Rock Furniture Mfg. Co. v. Kavanaugh, 111 Ark. 575, 164 S. W. 289; Schumacher v. 
Sumner Tel. Co., 161 Iowa 326, 142 N. W. 1034. 
5° Bennett v. Lathrop, 71 Conn. 613, 42 Atl. 634, 71 Am. St. R. 222. 
% Webster v. San Joaquin Fruit, etc., Ass’n., 32 Cal. App. 264, 162 Pac. 654. 
