Partnership By Estoppel

24 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Webster v. Clark
  34 Fla. 637· Fla.· 1894-06-01 ·cited 41×
  Webster and Rigney operated a saloon business at the Everett Hotel in Jacksonville. Webster was sued as a partner of E. Rigney & Co. for goods sold and delivered to the partnership. The Florida Supreme Court held that despite Webster's denials and the parties' characterization of
• Holt v. United States
  272 F.2d 272· 9th Cir.· 1959-11-05 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding of willful tax evasion and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for a bill of particulars and discovery.
• Sta-Rite Indus., Inc. v. Johnson
  453 F.2d 1192· 10th Cir.· 1971-12-30 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the record supported the district court's findings that no actual partnership existed and that liability by estoppel was not proven.
• Nelson v. Seaboard Sur. Co.
  269 F.2d 882· 8th Cir.· 1959-09-03 ·cited 24×
  The court held that while a partnership existed between H&R Construction and Investment Company, Seaboard Surety Company, with knowledge of this partnership, elected to deal solely with H&R Construction, thereby waiving its right to seek recovery from the Nelsons (Investment Comp
• Pinnacle Port Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. v. Orenstein
  872 F.2d 1536· 11th Cir.· 1989-05-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate regarding the oral contract and adoption claims, but affirmed summary judgment on joint venture, partnership by estoppel, general estoppel, promissory estoppel, and negligence claims based on the stipulation's requirements.
• Woods v. Allied Concord Fin. Corp. (delaware)
  373 F.2d 733· 5th Cir.· 1967-03-03 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in admitting the affidavit and that Mrs. Woods was bound as a partner by estoppel under Georgia law.
• In re McBEE v. W. Tex. Wholesale Supply Co.
  714 F.2d 1316· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-22 ·cited 14×
  A UCC financing statement filed under a trade name is effective against a bankruptcy trustee if it is not 'seriously misleading' to a reasonably diligent subsequent creditor, and a non-complying bulk sale does not extinguish the transferor's creditors' security interests.
• Millard B. Conklin v. Pruitt
  182 So. 2d 644· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-02-01 ·cited 14×
  Millard B. Conklin, an attorney, appealed a decree granting an accounting to nursing home operators and denying his counterclaim that he held a half-interest as a partner. The court affirmed the chancellor's finding that no partnership existed, holding that despite a "Partnership
• Xanadu OF Cocoa Beach, Inc. v. Zetley
  822 F.2d 982· 11th Cir.· 1987-07-24 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial court erred in failing to consider the doctrine of part performance, agency doctrines, and equitable defenses, and that a release did not bar claims that had not yet matured or claims not explicitly named.
• Carolina-Georgia Carpet & Textiles, Inc. v. Pelloni
  370 So. 2d 450· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-05-09 ·cited 12×
  Carolina-Georgia Carpet & Textiles, Inc. appeals a judgment for unpaid rent where the trial court held it liable for a lease assigned by John Schlicher without authorization. The appellate court reversed, finding no agency relationship, no estoppel, and no ratification by the def
• Eppinger v. Canepa
  20 Fla. 262· Fla.· 1883-06-01 ·cited 12×
  In this creditor's bill against an executor, the Florida Supreme Court held that life insurance proceeds with written directions payable to named beneficiaries are not assets of the estate subject to creditor claims, and remanded for proper decree form requiring sale of remaining
• Humphreys v. Drew
  59 Fla. 295· Fla.· 1910-01-01 ·cited 10×
  A. L. Humphreys and partners, doing business as The Live Oak Brick & Supply Co., were sued by M. C. Drew to recover a balance allegedly due on a promissory note. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed judgment for Drew, holding that defendants could not be estopped from liability mer
• Savers Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Amberley Huntsville, Ltd.
  934 F.2d 1199· 11th Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the D'Oench Duhme doctrine barred defenses based on unrecorded agreements, and the notes did not create a partnership or breach a duty of good faith. However, the nonrecourse nature of the notes limited liability to pledged assets.
• Emil Mach v. Mayo
  80 Fla. 372· Fla.· 1920-08-02 ·cited 5×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment against Emil Mach, finding insufficient evidence that he was a partner or held himself out as a partner to the plaintiff. The court held that jury instructions on partnership by estoppel were inapplicable to the facts presented.
• Branscome v. Schoneweis
  361 F.2d 717· 7th Cir.· 1966-05-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant was estopped from denying partnership due to his actions and representations, making him liable for the debt.
• Gonzalez v. Martinez
  897 So. 2d 525· Fla. 3d DCA· 2005-03-02 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Third District Court of Appeal reversed a medical malpractice judgment against Dr. Martinez, finding the trial court improperly limited the plaintiffs' ability to call treating physicians as witnesses. The court affirmed a directed verdict for Dr. Gutierrez.
• Bonavire v. Wampler
  779 F.2d 1011· 4th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that there was ample evidence to support the jury's verdict finding the defendants guilty of defrauding the plaintiffs and awarding damages.
• Boone v. Gay
  89 Fla. 347· Fla.· 1925-04-03 ·cited 3×
  This case consolidated two appeals concerning a corporation organized for religious purposes that was alleged to be a fraudulent scheme for commercial enterprises. The court affirmed the lower court's denial of motions to strike parts of the defendants' answer, finding the challe
• Greenfield v. Cohen
  432 So. 2d 574· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-04-12 ·cited 2×
  Greenfield was named as a co-partner in a commercial lease but challenged his liability as a partner by estoppel. The court affirmed judgment against him, finding that his signing of checks drawn on the partnership account and bearing the partnership name constituted sufficient e
• Van Deman & Lewis Co. v. Demos
  64 Fla. 533· Fla.· 1912-06-01 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed a judgment for the defendants in an assumpsit action. The plaintiff sued partners, but the court found no evidence of a partnership and that the jury properly considered whether the defendant held himself out as a partner, inducing the plaintiff to extend credi
• Post v. Roach
  26 Fla. 442· Fla.· 1890-06-01 ·cited 2×
  Post & Hunter sold goods to Roach & Co. on credit based on misrepresentations about security. When Post later assigned his assets to Green and Post & Hunter dissolved, Roach & Co. sought to enjoin the assignment and have the goods applied to their judgment. The Florida Supreme Co
• Handler v. C.A. No. 2022-0672-SG Centerview P'rs Holdings L.P.
  Del. Ch.· 2024-04-24
  The Court held that the plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that an oral partnership agreement was reached. Therefore, the plaintiff was not a partner in Topco and was not entitled to demand books and records under the relevant statute.
• Wallis M. Spence v. Tatum
  960 F.2d 65· 8th Cir.· 1992-03-26
  The court held that the evidence presented did not establish a submissible case for partnership liability, affirming the directed verdict.
• Rice v. Jessup
  92 Fla. 750· Fla.· 1926-10-16
  The appellate court affirmed a lower court's decision that dismissed a complaint. The complaint sought to hold a deceased individual liable for corporate debts, alleging he was a partner due to his stock ownership and the corporation's failure to file a required affidavit. The co