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) No edit summary |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Infobox Case Brief | {{Infobox Case Brief | ||
| court | |court= | ||
| citation | |citation= | ||
|subject=Business Associations | |||
| subject | |appealed_from= | ||
| appealed_from | |case_treatment=No | ||
| | |overturned= | ||
| | |partially_overturned= | ||
| | |reaffirmed= | ||
| | |questioned= | ||
| | |criticized= | ||
| | |distinguished= | ||
| | |cited= | ||
| | |followed= | ||
| | |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. | ||
| | 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. | ||
| | |procedural_history= | ||
| | |issues= | ||
| | |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. | |||
|judgment= | |||
|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. | |||
|rule= | |||
|comments= | |||
|case_text_links= | |||
|Court_opinion_parts= | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 01:13, September 17, 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.
