Mayhew v. McGlothlin
Decision Date | 08 June 1937 |
Citation | 106 S.W.2d 643,269 Ky. 184 |
Parties | MAYHEW v. McGLOTHLIN. |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Boyd County.
Equitable action by G. H. McGlothlin against George Mayhew. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Waugh & Howerton, of Ashland, for appellant.
Prichard & Holbrook, of Ashland, for appellee.
CREAL Commissioner.
On August 9, 1934, G. H. McGlothlin and George Mayhew entered into a written agreement to operate a partnership dairy on a small farm of the former in Boyd county.
On March 20, 1935, G. H. McGlothlin instituted this equitable action for a dissolution of the partnership and on final hearing it was adjudged that the partnership be dissolved and that the contract entered into between the parties be held null and void and of no force and effect; that the property belonging to the individual members of the partnership and used in its operation be restored to them; and that the remaining property consisting of eight calves and some farm implements, jointly owned, be equally divided if the parties could agree upon a division thereof, but in the event they could not, either party on his motion might have the case referred to the master commissioner to have same sold and the proceeds equally divided between the parties. Mayhew is appealing.
As grounds for reversal, it is argued that appellee did not sustain the allegations of his petition by sufficient evidence to warrant the judgment of the chancellor. It is alleged in substance in the petition that appellant had become indebted to appellee in the sum of $100 which he refused to pay; that the firm would be unable to continue business and that the business could not be properly conducted because of quarrels, dissension, and ill feelings of a serious, grievous, and permanent nature which had arisen without willful misconduct or fault on the part of appellee to such a degree as rendered the continuation of the partnership unprofitable for the partners and unsafe for the firm creditors; that the partners could not agree upon the method of dissolution and liquidation of the partnership affairs, and therefore it was necessary for the court to appoint a receiver to take charge of the firm's property and dispose of same by proper orders.
By answer appellant traversed the allegations of the petition setting up in full the partnership agreement, and alleged that he had complied with all the duties and obligations...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bpr Group Ltd. Partnership v. Bendetson
...provisions similar to § 32(1) (f).18 See Karber v. Karber, 145 Ariz. 293, 295, 701 P.2d 1 (Ct.App.1984); Mayhew v. McGlothlin, 269 Ky. 184, 186, 106 S.W.2d 643 (1937); Tiger, Inc. v. Fisher Agro, Inc., 301 S.C. 229, 238-239, 391 S.E.2d 538 (1989); H.J. Alperin, Summary of Basic Law § 14.32,......
-
Ferrick v. Ferrick
...61 N.E. 921 (quoting from Singer v. Heller, 40 Wis. 544),Lunt v. Van Gorden, 224 Iowa 1323, 1331, 278 N.W. 631;Mayhew v. McGlothlin, 269 Ky. 184, 186, 187, 106 S.W.2d 643;Fooks v. Williams, 120 Md. 436, 440, 441, 87 A. 692; Steckroth v. Ferguson, 281 Mich. 279, 282-284, 274 N.W. 792, and He......
-
Ferrick v. Barry
... ... are Whalen v. Stephens, 193 Ill. 121, 143 (quoting ... from Singer v. Heller, 40 Wis. 544), Lunt v. Van ... Gorden, 224 Iowa, 1323, 1331, Mayhew v. McGlothlin, 269 ... Ky. 184, 186-187, Fooks v. Williams, 120 Md. 436, ... 440-441, Steckroth v ... [320 Mass. 223] ... ...
-
Stark v. Reingold, PARAMOUNT-HUDSO
...v. Stockton, 55 N.J.Eq. 61, 64, 36 A. 488 (Ch.1896); Baxter v. West, 1 Dr. & Sm. 173, 62 Eng.Rep. 344 (1860); Mayhew v. McGlothlin, 269 Ky. 184, 106 S.W.2d 643 (1937). Cf. Crane, supra, at Note, Misconduct of or dissensions among partners or joint adventurers as ground for dissolution by co......