TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Houchen v. Gadberry (In re Gadberry)

In Re Jack F. GADBERRY, Debtor. Vernon H. HOUCHEN, Trustee in Bankruptcy, Plaintiff, v. Jack F. GADBERRY, William D. Hardy, G. & H. Disposal Company, a Partnership, Defendants

Houchen v. Gadberry (In re Gadberry), 30 B.R. 13 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 1983)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. Illinois · Bankruptcy Courts
Decided
May 12, 1983
Docket
No. 19-80266
Judges
Basil H. Coutrakon
Citations
30 B.R. 131983 Bankr. LEXIS 6223

Opinion — Coutrakon

OPINION AND ORDER BASIL H. COUTRAKON, Bankruptcy Judge.

The cause comes for hearing upon the Motion to Dismiss filed by William D. Hardy and G. & H. Disposal Company, a partnership, objecting to the Trustee’s Complaint to sell debtor’s interest in the partnership.

The reasoning in this matter is clear from Illinois law. Section 31(5) of the Partnership Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1981, ch. 106V2, par. 31(5)) mandates dissolution of a partnership “by the Bankruptcy of any partner...”

That dissolution, inter alia, terminates the authority of partners to act for the partnership (section 33), no longer binds the partnership by any act of a partner (section 35(3)) and allows only the remaining, non-bankrupt, partner to wind up the partnership affairs (section 37). There is no prohibition in either Illinois law or current Federal Bankruptcy law to the conveyance of the interest of a partner after dissolution has occurred.

*14 Nevertheless the Partnership Act does speak in general about the interest of a partner. “A partner’s interest in the partnership is his share of the profits and surplus, and the same is personal property.” (section 26) The Court can see no reason that this interest should change character after dissolution. Of course the trustee is vested with title to all personal property by virtue of Code section 541. ( 11 U.S.C. § 541 ). In fact Code section 541(c)(1)(B) would specifically treat the situation of partnership dissolution by including property “notwithstanding any provision — ... (B) that is conditioned on the insolvency or financial condition of the debtor, on the commencement of a case under this title.

Further, section 27 of the Partnership Act speaks of a conveyance of a partner’s interest and allows an assignee to receive his share of profits, but nothing more.

Therefore, the Court denies the Motion to Dismiss and holds that the Trustee may sell the debtor’s interest in G. & H. Disposal Company, a partnership.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

  • (permitting bankruptcy trustee to sell debtor’s interest in a partnership, since such an interest — including a partner’s right to share profits — is personal property unaffected by the bankruptcy of the debtor and the subsequent dissolution of the partnership)
1986: 11987: 11997: 119862026peak 1986 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Sunset Developers69 B.R. 710 (Bankr. D. Idaho 1987)
  2. In re Safren65 B.R. 566 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1986)
  3. Dailey v. Smith684 N.E.2d 991 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997)

Most recent

  1. Dailey v. Smith684 N.E.2d 991 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997)
  2. In re Sunset Developers69 B.R. 710 (Bankr. D. Idaho 1987)
  3. In re Safren65 B.R. 566 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1986)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list