Rights of partners in their interactions with other partners o Right to share

Rights of partners in their interactions with other

This preview shows page 2 - 4 out of 8 pages.

Rights of partners in their interactions with other partners; o Right to share management o Right to share in profits o Right to compensation o Property rights o Right to partnership interest o Right to inspect books o Right to an accountant Are all members of a partnership liable for interactions with third parties? Interactions between partners and third parties: o Each partner is an agent for the partnership o Partners have actual authority to bind the partnership in an agreement. o Partners do not have the implied authority to sell any property without consent from other partners. o Partners are jointly liable for partnership debts. o If a partner commits a tort/breach the partners are jointly and severally liable. o A new partner assumes liability for any obligations that occurred before she/he was added. Johnson v. St. Therese Medical Center (briefed below) considers how partners in a partnership can be held liable for the negligence of one partner. Point/Counterpoint: Should a minor be allowed to enter into a business partnership? Teaching tip: Here are some questions to help you tie the Point/Counterpoint into class discussion: Do you agree with the “yes” or the “no” side of this debate? Analyze this statement: The more a person learns about the U.S. legal system, the more likely the person is to agree with the “no” side of the debate. CASE BRIEFS WITH ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS 36-2
Image of page 2
Chapter 36 - Partnerships: Nature, Formation, and Operation Case 36-1 Ingram v. Deere, 52 Tex. Sup. 1030 (2009). Case Brief Issue: Did Drs. Ingram and Deere create a partnership when they started a pain clinic? Facts: Drs. Ingram and Deere started working together at a pain clinic. For fourteen months, they operated under an oral agreement. Then Dr. Ingram offered a written agreement to memorialize their arrangement. Dr. Deere was unhappy with the written agreement and sued under a wide range of theories. Procedural History: The appellate court found a partnership. Here, the highest court of Texas reverses. Holding: The doctors did not create a partnership for their pain clinic. Reasoning: Texas’s partnership act does not require direct proof of the parties’ intent to form a partnership. A share of profits as wages or other compensation to an employee or independent contractor is not indicative of a partnership interest in the business. Dr. Ingram wrote checks to Dr. Deer as a “medical consultant.” Deere has insufficient evidence to show that both parties expressed their intent to be partners. Dr. Deere never signed the lease, etc. He paid how own medical malpractice insurance, etc. Dr. Deere did not have control in the business, e.g., he was not allowed to see the books and records. Many topics were left un-discussed, e.g., what would happen with losses. There is no evidence that Dr. Deere contributed money or property to the clinic as a partner. Answers to the questions Critical Thinking The court went through a list of factors and, with each, discovered that Dr. Deere had little to do with the business aspects of running a pain clinic. It is possible that Dr. Deere does not have much
Image of page 3
Image of page 4

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture