Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

ZEBLEY v. OSTHEIMER (06/27/51)

THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


June 27, 1951

ZEBLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
OSTHEIMER

Appeal, No. 272, Jan. T., 1950, from decree of Court of Common Pleas No. 2 of Philadelphia County, Dec. T., 1947, No. 4300, in case of Earl Zebley v. Alfred J. Ostheimer, 3rd. Record Remanded.

COUNSEL

Joseph W. Henderson, with him J. Welles Henderson, Jr., George M. Brodhead and Rawle & Henderson, for appellant.

John R. Young, with him James F. McMullan, William H. Steeble, G. Selden Pitt and Clark, Brown, McCown, Fortenbaugh & Young, for appellee.

Before Drew, C.j., Stern, Stearne, Jones, Bell, Ladner and Chidsey, JJ.

[ 368 Pa. Page 22]

OPINION PER CURIAM

Ordinarily, in a partnership dissolution, the withdrawing partner is entitled to a full accounting of all the assets and earnings of the partnership, though of course the valuation extent and amount of the share payable to him is governed by the terms of dissolution as provided in the partnership agreement.

Here the court below endeavored to set up a formula gleaned from the agreement and so control the scope of the accounting. This endeavor, though commendable, is not free from difficulty in its practical application, because of the sharp division of the partners as to the correct interpretation of the dissolution provisions of the agreement as to which we feel an accounting on the basis of what the plaintiff claims he is entitled to may held clarify the problem.

[ 368 Pa. Page 23]

In the circumstances we think the defendant should state a complete account of all the detailed items of the partnership commissions received during the five years preceding the dissolution that plaintiff claims should be included (but are not so included in the present account) as part of the base on which he is entitled to 3/5 thereof under Class C, to be calculated under 11(b) of the agreement.

At the audit of this account, each item in dispute may then be passed upon, either individually or as a class, and allowed or disallowed, to the withdrawing partner, as the case may be, in the light of the requirements or interpretation of the agreement.

The record is remanded for further proceedings as indicated in this opinion.

Disposition

The record is remanded for further proceedings as indicated in this opinion.

19510627

© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.