VIRGINIA PARTNERS, LTD VS DAY
The liability of persons in partnership is guided by the type of partnership they are in. There are basically two types of partnerships; the limited partnership and the limited liability partnership. In limited partnership the partners are personally liable for business excesses, debts and losses and as such are paid by dividing them among themselves. The limited partnership has partners divided further into general and limited partners. General partners are personally liable for all partnership debts. Limited partners on the other hand have limited liability up to the original investment in the business. From the case study Virginia Partners Limited vs Day, it can be noted that Virginia Partners ltd is a limited partnership and have so be true makes the partners liable for any business liability.
MOLANDER v. RAUGUST-MATHWIG
BLACKWOOD COAL CO. v. DEISTER CONCENTRATOR
A legal suit can be brought against the Deister corporation of the following grounds. One from the case study the corporation agreed with Mr. Jeffrey Sammak and his brother Douglas to sell a machinery to them. Under the transfer of rights, a suit can be filled against the corporation. From the case study it is determined that Blackwood Coal Company was not incorporated until 1981. As such the company going ahead with the purchase of the said equipment ratified the actions of Douglas Sammak and Jeffery. The acceptance of the delivery was done on January of 1982 and the payments processed. From that it is clear that Deister was in contractual agreement with Blackwood Coal Company and not Jeffery and Douglas Sammak forthwith. Therefore, any fore signed or agreed rights are transferred to mean the actions of the two companies are now included in the agreement as true and enforceable by law. Any warranties that were given to the two brothers are hence ratified after the incorporation of the company. Deister agreed to accept the payment of the equipment without raising any legal concerns about the status of the business dealing and as such is entitled to any later breach of warranties.
MYSELS v. BARRY
Florida Fashions is a valid incorporated company in the state of Pennsylvania and as such entitled to all legal provision and regulation in the state this attributed to a fact stated in the case study. Florida Fashions is not a registered trade or business corporation in the state of Florida and as such not bound by the legal regulations in the state of Florida. Florida fashions can defend themselves as the laws in Florida do not necessarily impose statutory sanctions on the part of its agents or shareholders. The mere failure to secure a business permit to transact business in the state of Florida should be used to hold the company liable for debts or misdemeanors instituted against it.
