WebCitation. Prentiss v. Sheffel, 20 Ariz. App. 411, 513 P.2d 949, 1973 Ariz. App. LEXIS 749 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973) Brief Fact Summary. Defendant, Chris… WebNov 13, 1973 · Review Denied November 13, 1973. The Superior Court of Maricopa County, Cause No. C-234706, Thomas Tang, J., affirmed judicial sale of partnership property to …
Prentiss v. Sheffel :: 1973 :: Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One ...
WebPrentiss v. Sheffel a. Facts: Oral agreement to enter into partnership and buy a shopping center, did not specify terms nor operational or management duties. Sheffel owns 85% interest, Prentiss owns 15%. Fought about a lot of things, irreparable rift. Prentiss couldn’t pay his share, Sheffel excludes him from all duties. WebPrentiss v. Sheffel Black Letter Rule: Upon dissolution of a partnership, a former partner may bid on the partnership assets at a judicial sale. Pav-Saver Corp. v. Vasso Corp. Black Letter Rule: Upon a wrongful dissolution of a partnership in violation of the partnership agreement, ... healthscope nevada
Prentiss v. Sheffel , 20 Ariz. App. 411 ( 1973 ) - Court Case
WebPrentiss v. Sheffel [157 159]-Pav Saver Corporation v. Vasso Corporation [160 165]-Kovacik v. Reed [166-167] -G&S Investments v. Belman [170-174] RUPA §§ 601, 602, ... -Sea Land Services, Inc. v. Pepper Source [204 210], Note on corporate groups [211]--A.P. Smith Mfg. Co. Barlow [214-218], Note [219] -Dodge v. Ford Motor Co. [220-225] WebCitationPrentiss v. Sheffel, 20 Ariz. App. 411, 513 P.2d 949, 1973 Ariz. App. LEXIS 749 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973) Brief Fact Summary. Defendant, Chris Prentiss, appealed the decision to allow Plaintiffs, his former partners, to successfully bid for the business after it was dissolved. Synopsis of Rule of Law. WebGet Prentiss v. Sheffel, 20 Ariz.App. 411, 513 P.2d 949 (1973), Arizona Court of Appeals, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Written and curated by … healthscope northern beaches hospital