I have questions in LAW Course, but I didnt find the subject in options, please help me and give me the answer.

this the questions.

case: 4,5,6,9,10.

thank you.

2. For each assigned case, analyze the issue based on the following criteria: o Identify the parties involved in the case dispute (who is the plaintif and who is the defendant). o Identify the facts associated with the case and fact patterns. o Develop the appropriate legal issue(s) in question (i.e., the specific legal issue between the two parties).Provide a judgment on who should win the case- be clear o Support your decision with an appropriate rule of law. Chapter 36 Partnerships: Nature, Formation, and Operation 811 rela- deteno- he year facility. When Parham-Woodman stopped making payments on the loan, the bank sold the building and sued the firm and the partners to recover the debt not paid. The partners argued that they were not liable for the debt because they had joined the firm after the loan agreement was made. Do you agree with them? Why or why not? [Citizens Bank of Massachusetts Parham-Woodman Medical Associates. 874 E Supp. 705 (1995).] 10. Phillip Heller was a partner of the Pillsbury Madison & Sutro law firm. The relationship between Heller and the firm was not strong, as Heller's regard to equalizing payments as a result of the es incurred with the failed business opportunity Mannes claims that this was the first time he ever ved notice about any outstanding payments After unsuccessfully seeking reimbursement from Mannes, Byker filed suit for the recovery of the money on the basis that the two men had entered into a partnership. Specifically. Byker asserted that the obligations between him and the defendant were not limited to their formal business relation- Star's half an recover ed under d breach counter y duties p agree- his con- ships established by the individual partnerships and corporate entities but that there was a "general" partnership underlying all their business affairs. In response, Mannes asserted that he merely invested in separate business ventures with the plaintiff and that there were no other understandings between them. Did the two businessmen form a partnership. or were their business deals all separate ventures? Was there intent to make a consensual business relationship even though Mannes argues there was not? [Byker Mannes, 465 Mich.637; 641 N.W.2d 210 (2002). 1995) work performance was unsatisfactory. He billed 1,000 hours fewer than he had estimated that he would produce, and he did not establish strong working relationships. Heller signed the partner ship agreement in 1992. The agreement autho- rized the Executive Committee to expel partners After Heller submitted a derogatory and lewd article entitled "Why 1 Fired My Secretary," the commit tee met and terminated Heller's partnership. Heller challenged the authority of the committee to expel him, regardless of whether he had signed the part- nership agreement. Do you think the court agreed with him? Why or why not? [Heller v. Pillsbury Madison & Sutro, 58 Cal. Rptr. 2d 336 (1996).] vestors d Smith a Robert e Hotel offer to 500,000 f credit caused interests 9 Richard Hunley, Nada Tas, Joseph Tas, and Kenneth Brown all became general partners of Parham- Woodman between 1986 and 1987. In 1985, Citizens Bank of Massachusetts loaned Parham-Woodman 52 million for the construction of a new office ue Pietz reach of y settled the cost L Pietz's Part 7 Business Organizations case to court. The district court entered judgment against Hardy and Jackson, jointly and severally, for an amount representative of Jones's interest in the partnership. Jackson and Hardy appealed the district court's decision. How do you think the court decided? [MacKay v. Hardy, 896 P.2d 626 (1995).] 6. Stephen Wainger is a former partner of the law firm Glasser & Glasser. According to the partner- ship agreement, a withdrawing partner is entitled to compensation for "any undivided profits of the firm with respect to uncollected fees which were fully earned by the firm prior to the effective date of his with line. Construction begun. Stiltner disag essary; he thought sewage from the pro yet commenced com the building access n cal, electrical, and o to remove his person A complete breakdow Stiltner and Disotell the partnership never court, as a matter of and judicially supervi Questions & Problems Thind L What stages must occur for the termination of a partnership to be complete? 1 Why is the partnership's debt particularly impor- tant in the winding-up stage? 3 What are the advantages of being a limited partner rather than a general partner? purporting to withdraw from the partnership while in reality seizing control of its assets. Furthermore, they transferred the assets of the partnership to their new company, preventing Greenfeld from having computer access to the business files, software, and client records. Was the partnership terminated prop- erly? If the dissolution was wrongful, what poten- tial consequences could Stitely and Karstetter face? [Wayne I. Greenfeld v. Frank L. Stitely, et al.. 2007 Va. Cir. LEXIS 7 (2007).] d at enhip 4 In June 2001, Greenfeld, Stitely, and Karstetter negotiated to merge their practices into a partner- ship that would provide accounting, tax, and infor- mation technology services. The partnership was profitable every year from its inception. However, Stitely felt that Greenfeld's information technol- ogy services were not generating as much revenue as his one-third share in the partnership should. So Sutely indicated to the partners that he wanted to withdraw from the partnership. Soon after, Stitely and Karstetter agreed to instead continue as part- acrs together after Greenfeld was out of the picture. Grecnfeld did not violate his partnership agreement b the two partners forced Greenfeld out of the part- nership without compensating him for his interest. They accomplished this by unlawful means, such as hile also gets 5. Jones and Hardy entered into an oral partnership agreement. They planned to develop and lease certain areas of land. Together, they formed the Bloomington Knolls Association. Jones and Hardy began to experience financial problems, and they brought in a third partner, Jackson, to arrange nddi- tional financing for the project. Jones subsequently dissolved the partnership and requested that he be given a portion of the land as his share of the part- nership assets. Jackson and Hardy did not honor his request, and Jones never received any assets of the partnership. Jones moved for an accounting and winding up of partnership affairs and brought the related individal ty 2. For each assigned case, analyze the issue based on the following criteria: o Identify the parties involved in the case dispute (who is the plaintif and who is the defendant). o Identify the facts associated with the case and fact patterns. o Develop the appropriate legal issue(s) in question (i.e., the specific legal issue between the two parties).Provide a judgment on who should win the case- be clear o Support your decision with an appropriate rule of law. Chapter 36 Partnerships: Nature, Formation, and Operation 811 rela- deteno- he year facility. When Parham-Woodman stopped making payments on the loan, the bank sold the building and sued the firm and the partners to recover the debt not paid. The partners argued that they were not liable for the debt because they had joined the firm after the loan agreement was made. Do you agree with them? Why or why not? [Citizens Bank of Massachusetts Parham-Woodman Medical Associates. 874 E Supp. 705 (1995).] 10. Phillip Heller was a partner of the Pillsbury Madison & Sutro law firm. The relationship between Heller and the firm was not strong, as Heller's regard to equalizing payments as a result of the es incurred with the failed business opportunity Mannes claims that this was the first time he ever ved notice about any outstanding payments After unsuccessfully seeking reimbursement from Mannes, Byker filed suit for the recovery of the money on the basis that the two men had entered into a partnership. Specifically. Byker asserted that the obligations between him and the defendant were not limited to their formal business relation- Star's half an recover ed under d breach counter y duties p agree- his con- ships established by the individual partnerships and corporate entities but that there was a "general" partnership underlying all their business affairs. In response, Mannes asserted that he merely invested in separate business ventures with the plaintiff and that there were no other understandings between them. Did the two businessmen form a partnership. or were their business deals all separate ventures? Was there intent to make a consensual business relationship even though Mannes argues there was not? [Byker Mannes, 465 Mich.637; 641 N.W.2d 210 (2002). 1995) work performance was unsatisfactory. He billed 1,000 hours fewer than he had estimated that he would produce, and he did not establish strong working relationships. Heller signed the partner ship agreement in 1992. The agreement autho- rized the Executive Committee to expel partners After Heller submitted a derogatory and lewd article entitled "Why 1 Fired My Secretary," the commit tee met and terminated Heller's partnership. Heller challenged the authority of the committee to expel him, regardless of whether he had signed the part- nership agreement. Do you think the court agreed with him? Why or why not? [Heller v. Pillsbury Madison & Sutro, 58 Cal. Rptr. 2d 336 (1996).] vestors d Smith a Robert e Hotel offer to 500,000 f credit caused interests 9 Richard Hunley, Nada Tas, Joseph Tas, and Kenneth Brown all became general partners of Parham- Woodman between 1986 and 1987. In 1985, Citizens Bank of Massachusetts loaned Parham-Woodman 52 million for the construction of a new office ue Pietz reach of y settled the cost L Pietz's Part 7 Business Organizations case to court. The district court entered judgment against Hardy and Jackson, jointly and severally, for an amount representative of Jones's interest in the partnership. Jackson and Hardy appealed the district court's decision. How do you think the court decided? [MacKay v. Hardy, 896 P.2d 626 (1995).] 6. Stephen Wainger is a former partner of the law firm Glasser & Glasser. According to the partner- ship agreement, a withdrawing partner is entitled to compensation for "any undivided profits of the firm with respect to uncollected fees which were fully earned by the firm prior to the effective date of his with line. Construction begun. Stiltner disag essary; he thought sewage from the pro yet commenced com the building access n cal, electrical, and o to remove his person A complete breakdow Stiltner and Disotell the partnership never court, as a matter of and judicially supervi Questions & Problems Thind L What stages must occur for the termination of a partnership to be complete? 1 Why is the partnership's debt particularly impor- tant in the winding-up stage? 3 What are the advantages of being a limited partner rather than a general partner? purporting to withdraw from the partnership while in reality seizing control of its assets. Furthermore, they transferred the assets of the partnership to their new company, preventing Greenfeld from having computer access to the business files, software, and client records. Was the partnership terminated prop- erly? If the dissolution was wrongful, what poten- tial consequences could Stitely and Karstetter face? [Wayne I. Greenfeld v. Frank L. Stitely, et al.. 2007 Va. Cir. LEXIS 7 (2007).] d at enhip 4 In June 2001, Greenfeld, Stitely, and Karstetter negotiated to merge their practices into a partner- ship that would provide accounting, tax, and infor- mation technology services. The partnership was profitable every year from its inception. However, Stitely felt that Greenfeld's information technol- ogy services were not generating as much revenue as his one-third share in the partnership should. So Sutely indicated to the partners that he wanted to withdraw from the partnership. Soon after, Stitely and Karstetter agreed to instead continue as part- acrs together after Greenfeld was out of the picture. Grecnfeld did not violate his partnership agreement b the two partners forced Greenfeld out of the part- nership without compensating him for his interest. They accomplished this by unlawful means, such as hile also gets 5. Jones and Hardy entered into an oral partnership agreement. They planned to develop and lease certain areas of land. Together, they formed the Bloomington Knolls Association. Jones and Hardy began to experience financial problems, and they brought in a third partner, Jackson, to arrange nddi- tional financing for the project. Jones subsequently dissolved the partnership and requested that he be given a portion of the land as his share of the part- nership assets. Jackson and Hardy did not honor his request, and Jones never received any assets of the partnership. Jones moved for an accounting and winding up of partnership affairs and brought the related individal ty