Case Names Flashcards
Summers v. Dooley
Trash collectors case.
Rule: One partner could not unilaterally bind the business.
Martin v. Peyton
A partnership with creditors.
Rule: Creditors were not partners because they had no agency
Kessler v. Antinora
One partner provided money, the other labor.
Rule: where one partner contributes money to the venture and the other contributes services or labor, in the event of a loss neither party is liable to the other for any loss sustained.
Meinhard v. Salmon
New lease without notifying his partner or including him.
Rule: partners, have a fiduciary duty to each other (which includes the duty of the finest loyalty), including sharing in any benefits that result from the parties’ joint venture.
Roach v. Mead
One partner gave bad advice to a client.
Rule: A partner is jointly and severally liable for the tortious acts of another partner if he authorizes those acts or if the acts are committed in the ordinary course of the partnership’s business.
Singer v. Singer
Partners bought land the partnership was considering.
Rule: A partner has a fiduciary duty not to compete with other partners, or with the partnership itself, in the absence of a partnership agreement stating otherwise.
Enea v. Superior Court
partners renting partnership property to themselves at less than its fair market value.
Rule: The fiduciary duties imposed on partners by operation of law unquestionably bar them from conferring such benefits upon themselves at the partnership’s expense.
Meehan v. Shaughnessy
Partners started a new firm but denied it.
Rule: A partner has a fiduciary duty to provide, on demand of another partner, true and complete information
National Biscuit Company v. Stroud
One partner purchased bread over the objection of the other.
Rule: each party has the power to bind the partnership in matters pertaining to the partnership’s business.
Rapoport v. 55 Perry Co.
assigned 10 percent of their partnership share to their two adult children
Rule: Partners can assign their right to profits but cannot unilaterally add new partners to the partnership.
Collins v. Lewis
Dissolution of a term partnership.
Rule: A partner does not have a legal right to force dissolution of a partnership if the other partner fulfills his or her duties under the partnership agreement.
Dreifuerst v. Dreifuerst
Brothers, some voted to dissolve the at will partnership.
Rule: partnership at will, a partnership which has no definite term or particular undertaking and can rightfully be dissolved by the express will of any partner.
In Re USACafes
USACafes, Inc. is a limited partnership whose general partner was USACafes General Partner, Inc., a Delaware corporation.
Rule: the shareholders of the corporation owe fiduciary duties to both the partnership and corporation.
Gateway Potato
Sunworth Packing Limited Partnership consisted of one general partner, Sunworth Corporation, and one limited partner, G.B. Investment Co.
Rule: A limited partner may be personally liable for partnership debts if the limited partner has performed substantially the same role as a general partner, even if the limited partner had no interaction with the creditor.
Bane v. Ferguson
Retired partner could not get retirement benefits
Rule: A partnership has fiduciary duties to other partners, but not to former partners.