By Morris James LLP on August 23, 2006
Hillman v. Hillman, C.A. No. 1557-N (Del. Ch. August 23, 2006, modified,November 16, 2006).
When a general partner is dismissed as the limited partnership's general partner, the DRULPA is not clear on what happens to the interest of that former general partner. After a close reading of the statute and its legislative history, the Court of Chancery concluded that the former general partner is entitled to be paid back his partnership interest, but otherwise has no continuing interest in the limited partnership. The decision affects partnerships that have not provided for the result of a general partner dismissal in the partnership agreement. Note also, this decision deals solely with a general partner who is dismissed, not one who withdraws and is then subject to other sections of the statute.
Share
By Morris James LLP on June 2, 2006
Kevin McGovern, et. al. v. General Holding, Inc., et. al., C.A. No. 1296-N (Del. Ch. June 2, 2006).
In this action to recover for the diversion of partnership property, the Court of Chancery fashioned a unique remedy by ordering that the partnership be sold by a receiver so as to realize the special value of its technology.
More ›
Share
By Morris James LLP on May 24, 2006
Anglo American Security Fund, L.P. v. S.R. Global Int'l Fund, L.P., C.A. No. 20066-N, 2006 WL 1494360 (Del. Ch. May 24, 2006).
Plaintiffs and defendants brought cross-motions for summary judgment on claims arising from disputes over interpretation of limited partnership agreement ("LPA").
More ›
Share
By Morris James LLP on May 18, 2006
McGovern v. General Holding, Inc., C.A. No. 1296-N, 2006 WL 1468850 (Del. Ch. May 18, 2006).
Plaintiffs brought action individually and on behalf of limited partnership against 90% owner of limited partnership for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of limited partnership agreement.
More ›
Share
By Morris James LLP on February 22, 2006
Madison Real Estate Immobbilien-Anlagegesellschaft Beschrankt Haftende KG v. GENO One Financial Place L.P. and GENO Auslandsimmobilien GmbH, No. Civ.A. No. 1928-N, 2006 WL 456779 (Del. Ch. Feb. 22, 2006).
The plaintiff is a German entity organized under that country's laws, as is the second named German limited liability defendant. The latter party is also a general partner in the first defendant entity. The plaintiff was one of two bidders that made an unregulated tender offer for a part of the first-named defendant's Delaware limited partnership interest. Plaintiff filed a motion in the Court of Chancery for expedited injunction proceedings, seeking to enjoin the defendant's general partner from approving any transfer agreements related to the tender offers.
More ›
Share
By Morris James LLP on February 10, 2006
Ramunno v. Capano, et al., C.A. No. 18798-NC, 2006 WL 375541 (Del. Ch. Feb. 10, 2006).
This is a fiduciary claim based action to appraise the fair value of real property brought by the trustee of four trusts that held a 12.1% interest in that property held by the defendant entity and its two majority interest holders, after that entity's merger into a new Delaware limited partnership.
More ›
Share
By Morris James LLP on October 5, 2005
Ruggerio v. Poppiti, C.A. No. 18961, 2005 WL 2622716 (Del. Ch. Oct. 5, 2005).
Plaintiff, who was limited partner of partnership and sole stockholder of corporation controlled by Defendants, alleged that Defendants failed to report or account to him regarding his ownership interest in the entities, breached their fiduciary duties and commingled assets. Defendants counterclaimed for money loaned by limited partnership to corporation.
More ›
Share
By Morris James LLP on January 24, 2005
Jacques Pomeranz, et al. v. Museum Partners, L.P., C.A. No. 20211, 2005 WL 217039 (Del. Ch. Jan. 24, 2005).
In this motion to dismiss opinion, the court examines whether the claims were tolled or untimely and held against the plaintiff. The plaintiff had instituted contract claims, fiduciary duty violation claims and a breach of the limited partnership agreement claim against the defendant-partners.
More ›
Share