London v. Boshes
This large and complicated appeal arises out of the winding up of a partnership. Appellant Ralph W. Boshes (Boshes), one of the original partners of The Verdugo 5 partnership, asserts, inter alia, that the trial court erred in (1) finding that he did not have a right to purchase the partnerships real property at liquidation upon dissolution; (2) failing to conduct a proper accounting for the partnership; (3) determining that respondents Ronald Lasken (Lasken) and the London Trust[1]each held a 40 percent interest in the partnership and its property; (4) applying equitable doctrines against Boshes and his claims asserted in this litigation; and (5) imposing costs against Boshes and denying his request for attorney fees. Like the trial court, Court are largely unpersuaded by Boshess contentions.
Court agree with Boshes that the trial court erred in failing to conduct a proper accounting for the partnership. The matter is remanded to the trial court to conduct a complete accounting of the partnership; an account must be taken from the beginning until the end of the partnership. We also agree with Boshes that the trial court erred in ordering him to pay the balance owed to the receiver ($1,600) as of November 22, 2005; because that amount was not set forth in respondents memoranda of costs, Boshes was not given an opportunity to challenge that cost. Thus, that portion of the trial courts judgment requiring Boshes to pay $1,600 is reversed and remanded to the trial court for proper allocation.
In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.
Comments on London v. Boshes