Kaufmann v. Kaufmann
Citations
- 222 Pa. 58
- 70 A. 956
- 1908 Pa. LEXIS 659
Syllabus
<p>Partnership — Purchase of deceased partner’s interest — Appraisement of value of interest — Equity—Pleading—Demurrer.</p> <p>Where articles of copartnership provide that in ease of the death of one of the partners, the survivors shall have the option to purchase the deceased partner's interest at a valuation to be ascertained in a manner specifically set forth in the articles, a court of equity has no power to change the method of valuation merely because the good will of the business has enormously increased in value since the date of the articles, and because the method of valuation therein prescribed would lead to inequitable results.</p> <p>Where articles of copartnership provide that surviving partners shall have the option to purchase and take over the interest of a deceased partner in a manner specified, and, upon the death of one of the partners, the surviving partners take over the deceased's interest in the way ■provided by the articles, a demurrer to a bill in equity charging them with having arbitrarily, and without right and unjustly seized upon the interest of the deceased, does not admit any illegal conduct on the part of the defendants, inasmuch as the averment in the bill is but an inference on the part of the plaintiffs that the defendants had acted illegally.</p> <p>A demurrer admits the facts fairly pleaded, but it does not admit argumentative conclusions or doubtful inferences from undisputed facts.</p> <p>Partnership — Participation in profits — Contribution of capital — Compensation for services.</p> <p>A mere participation in the profits of a business will not make the parties partners inter sese, whatever it may do as to third persons unless they so intended.</p> <p>A share in the profits of a business as a compensation for services does not constitute the person receiving such share a partner in the business.</p> <p>Where a partnership, consisting of four persons, enters into an agreement in writing with one of its employees, by which th
Judges: Brown, Elkin, Fell, Mestrezat, Mitchell, Potter, Stewart
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Hyam v. Upper Montgomery Joint AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1960-04-26· cited 58×
- Burley Irr. Dist. v. IckesD.C. Circuit· 1940-09-30· cited 20×
- Ehmling v. D. L. Ward Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1924-03-03· cited 16×
- O'DONNELL v. McLoughlinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1956-09-24· cited 14×
- Keyes v. HurlbertCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1941-03-17· cited 10×
- Arbuckle's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1916-01-03· cited 7×
- Lawrence v. SudmanS.D. New York· 1945-06-21· cited 5×
- City of Wheeling v. ChesterThird Circuit· 1943-04-12· cited 5×
- Strauss v. MendelsohnSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1916-07-18· cited 3×
- Dloss Realty Corp. v. Schultz Brewing Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery· 1935-04-23· cited 1×
- In re Wright's EstatePalm Beach County Judge's Court· 1954-07-29
- Frey Bros. v. DoughertyNorthampton County Court of Common Pleas· 1925-01-12
- Com. ex rel. Woodruff v. American Base Ball ClubDauphin County Court of Common Pleas· 1926-10-28
- Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance v. Smyser-Royer Co.York County Court of Common Pleas· 1943-11-22
- Stoner EstateLebanon County Court of Common Pleas· 1975-08-07
Cites
4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Thomas v. Central RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1900-02-05· cited 34×
- Hazard v. HazardU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island· 1840-11-15· cited 18×
- Edwards v. TracySupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1870-06-03· cited 15×
- Rohrbacher's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1895-05-20· cited 6×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.