Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
During the closing on the Parcel P and D executed a document that P purports to establish a partnership. The agreement stated its purpose to form a partnership, listed the partners, the terms of the agreement and the fact that DUPL law was to apply. It also listed respective capital contributions between the partners. D asserts that while he signed the agreement, he did not read it and that he was relying on his attorney who also represented P to conduct the business in a limited liability manner. D also maintains that he was not to become an equity participant in the venture until the Parcel had been successfully rezoned. Evidence shows that D sent a memorandum to the realtor handling the sale of the Parcel and, in the course of approving the sale, noted that his approval was per the partnership agreement. P moved for summary judgment. P seeks dissolution of that partnership because it no longer has any useful purpose. P seeks payment by D of his required capital contribution and reimbursement from D of his proportionate share of the Partnership's losses which P absorbed from D's share of the venture. D also moved for summary judgment and sought sanctions under Court of Chancery Rule 11 against Hynansky.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co