Resnick v. Kaplan
Maryland Court of Special Appeals
434 A.2d 582 (1981)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Murray Resnick (defendant) and four other lawyers, including Solomon Kaplan (plaintiffs), were partners in a five-member law firm. The firm dissolved when Resnick left to open his own practice. The remaining partners sued Resnick for an accounting. The trial court entered summary judgment apportioning the firm’s assets among all five former partners. The partnership agreement lacked any provision to address the rights of former partners following the firm’s dissolution. Therefore, the trial court allocated the dissolved firm’s aggregate winding-up fees according to the agreement’s provisions for distributing the firm’s profits and losses. Resnick appealed to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, where he argued that the court’s award gave Resnick insufficient credit for his role in closing out the dissolved firm’s open cases.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Moore, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
