Page v. Page case brief summary
359 P.2d 41
SYNOPSIS: The Superior Court of Santa Barbara County (California) held that the partnership between plaintiff supplying partner and defendant remaining partner was for a term, namely, such reasonable time as was necessary to enable the partnership to repay from partnership profits, indebtedness incurred for the operation of such business. The supplying partner appealed the decision.
FACTS:
-Two partners entered into an oral partnership agreement.
-The supplying partner owned a corporation that supplied the linen and machinery necessary for the business.
-When the partnership suffered losses for eight years, the supplying partner wanted to terminate the partnership, despite a slight improvement in the next two years.
ISSUE:
-whether the partners had provided that the partnership would stay in business until the business paid itself out.
HOLDING:
-Under Cal. Corp. Code § 15031(1)(b), a partnership was dissolved by express will of any partner when no definite term or particular undertaking was specified.
-The court found that there was no partnership for a term.
ANALYSIS:
-The remaining partner failed to prove any facts from which an agreement to continue the partnership for a term could have been implied.
-There was no bad faith by the supplying partner, and there was no showing that the improved profit situation was more than temporary.
OUTCOME: The court reversed the judgment declaring the partnership to be for a term rather than at will.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
359 P.2d 41
SYNOPSIS: The Superior Court of Santa Barbara County (California) held that the partnership between plaintiff supplying partner and defendant remaining partner was for a term, namely, such reasonable time as was necessary to enable the partnership to repay from partnership profits, indebtedness incurred for the operation of such business. The supplying partner appealed the decision.
FACTS:
-Two partners entered into an oral partnership agreement.
-The supplying partner owned a corporation that supplied the linen and machinery necessary for the business.
-When the partnership suffered losses for eight years, the supplying partner wanted to terminate the partnership, despite a slight improvement in the next two years.
ISSUE:
-whether the partners had provided that the partnership would stay in business until the business paid itself out.
HOLDING:
-Under Cal. Corp. Code § 15031(1)(b), a partnership was dissolved by express will of any partner when no definite term or particular undertaking was specified.
-The court found that there was no partnership for a term.
ANALYSIS:
-The remaining partner failed to prove any facts from which an agreement to continue the partnership for a term could have been implied.
-There was no bad faith by the supplying partner, and there was no showing that the improved profit situation was more than temporary.
OUTCOME: The court reversed the judgment declaring the partnership to be for a term rather than at will.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment