Baybank v. Catamount Construction, Inc.
New Hampshire Supreme Court
693 A.2d 1163 (1997)
Facts
Eugene and John Connor (defendants) served as guarantors on a promissory note held by Baybank (plaintiff), which was made by Catamount Construction, Inc. (defendant). After obtaining a judgment against the Connors in superior court, Baybank sought a charging order against the Connors and dissolution of their limited partnership, East Street Limited Partnership (East Street), for satisfaction of the judgment debt. The superior court granted Baybank a charging order and ordered East Street to be dissolved and the appointment of a receiver to dispose of the Connors’ interest in East Street. Although the Connors conceded that Baybank was entitled to a charging order against their limited partnership interest under the Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (RULPA), they objected to dissolution of the partnership. The trial court found that it had broad power to order additional relief under the Uniform Partnership Act (UPA) § 28 and that no conflict existed among the relevant RULPA and UPA provisions. The Connors claimed it was an error to apply any of UPA’s remedial provisions to RULPA and appealed to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Johnson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 705,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,300 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
