PINE GROVE DEVELOPMENT CORP., APPELLANT,
v.
DADE SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND BEVERLY HILLS SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida's statutory scheme for distributing limited partnership assets upon dissolution controls over contrary contractual provisions between partners.
Section 620.23(1), Florida Statutes controls the priority of distribution of limited partnership assets upon dissolution notwithstanding an agreement to the contrary.
[1] The statutory scheme for distributing limited partnership assets upon dissolution controls over contractual provisions to the contrary when the statute does not expressly…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePine Grove Development Corp. appealed a trial court decision regarding the validity of a contract establishing priorities in the distribution of limit…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Statutory Scheme cases and more on FLexlaw
FERGUSON, Judge.
This appeal questions the validity of a contract which establishes priorities in the distribution of limited partnership assets, as between limited and general partners, inconsistent with the statutory scheme.
In accordance with Consolidated Amalgamated Developments, Ltd. v. Gup, 428 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 438 So. 2d 832 (Fla.1983), the trial court held that section 620.23(1), Florida Statutes (1983) controls the priority of distribution of limited partnership assets among partners upon dissolution notwithstanding an agreement to the contrary.1 We agree. In the cases relied upon by appellant, e.g., Lanier v. Bowdoin, 282 N.Y. 32, 24 N.E. 2d 732 (1939), the.state statute expressly provided that it is controlling only in the absence of an agreement between the partners as to the order of distribution.
Affirmed.
. We note that Florida has not adopted the Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (1976) which provides in pertinent part:
§ 804 [Distribution of Assets]
Upon the winding up of a limited partnership, the assets shall be distributed as follows:
**
(3) except as provided in the partnership agreement, to partners first for the return of their contributions and secondly respecting their partnership interests, in the proportions in which the partners share in distributions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Consol. Amalgamated Developments, Ltd. v. GUP, 428 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)