John D. Williamson, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross v. Gordon G. Tucker, Defendants-Appellees-Cross

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• identifying three instances in which a partnership interest may qualify as an “investment contract” because of limitations on control otherwise afforded to a general partner
• noting the “unique power of district courts to make factual findings which are decisive of jurisdiction” based on “conflicting written and oral evidence”
• \The defendants' exhibits contain documents from previous ventures which indicate that [two investors] had already been members of other joint ventures organized by [the managers].\
• investment contract may exist where the number of partners makes a vote more akin to a corporate shareholder vote
• decision by investing partners to attend meetings when trouble arose belies partners’ passive role
• when trial court does not resolve disputed facts in granting a dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, appellate review is limited to determining whether ruling is correct based on the undisputed facts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).