Bauer v. Blomfield Co. case brief summary
849 P.2d 1365 (1993)
CASE FACTS
To secure a loan, the assignors assigned all of their right, title, and interest in a partnership to the assignee. The individual partners consented to the assignment, pursuant to Alaska Stat. § 32.05.220. The assignors defaulted and the assignee sent notice to the partnership that he was exercising his rights to receive all distributions of income and principal from the partnership. The partners stopped making income payments to the assignee and instead, agreed to use the income to pay a commission to one partner. The assignee was not a party to the agreement, was not asked to consent to it, and never agreed to forego payment or pay part of the commission.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The superior court dismissed his suit that sought declaratory and injunctive relief and damages.
DISCUSSION
The order granting summary judgment to the partnership and individual partners and dismissing the complaint of the assignee was affirmed.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.
849 P.2d 1365 (1993)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellant assignee sought review of an
order of the Superior Court of the State of Alaska, First Judicial
District, Juneau that granted summary judgment in favor of appellees,
partnership and individual partners, and dismissed the assignee's
complaint, in an action to recover partnership profits that the
assignee alleged were wrongfully withheld from him.CASE FACTS
To secure a loan, the assignors assigned all of their right, title, and interest in a partnership to the assignee. The individual partners consented to the assignment, pursuant to Alaska Stat. § 32.05.220. The assignors defaulted and the assignee sent notice to the partnership that he was exercising his rights to receive all distributions of income and principal from the partnership. The partners stopped making income payments to the assignee and instead, agreed to use the income to pay a commission to one partner. The assignee was not a party to the agreement, was not asked to consent to it, and never agreed to forego payment or pay part of the commission.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The superior court dismissed his suit that sought declaratory and injunctive relief and damages.
DISCUSSION
- The court affirmed and held that the assignment of the right, title, and interest in the partnership did not make the assignee a partner pursuant to §32.05.220, and he was not entitled to interfere in the management or administration of the partnership business or affairs, to require any information or account of partnership transactions, or to inspect the partnership books under Alaska Stat. § 32.05.220(a).
The order granting summary judgment to the partnership and individual partners and dismissing the complaint of the assignee was affirmed.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.
No comments:
Post a Comment