Summers v. Dooley: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (1 revision imported: Import of multiple Business Association case briefs) |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
| followed = | | followed = | ||
| related = | | related = | ||
}} | }} | ||
'''Facts''': Parties formed a partnership to operate a trash collection business. When one was unable to work, he hired a replacement at his own cost. | '''Facts''': Parties formed a partnership to operate a trash collection business. When one was unable to work, he hired a replacement at his own cost. | ||
Revision as of 05:22, September 9, 2020
| Summers v. Dooley | |
| Court | |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | |
Facts: Parties formed a partnership to operate a trash collection business. When one was unable to work, he hired a replacement at his own cost. in '62, Dooley became unable to work, and hired a replacement. Summers wanted to hire additional help, but Dooley said no. Summers did anyway, and paid out of pocket for the help, then sued for reimbursement.
Arguments: P said that D still profited from the work of the 3d party even though he didn't want to hire him.
Holding: No compensation.
Reasons: It is unjust to permit recovery of an expense which was incurred individually and not for the benefit of the partnership but rather for the benefit on one partner.
