BURNING FOOT, LTD., A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, APPELLANT,
v.
RICHARD D. HOOVER, M.D., APPELLEE
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.
In a partnership dispute, the trial court entered a partial summary judgment requiring an accounting of partnership assets. The appellate court affirmed the judgment but clarified that the court's order required only copies of previously prepared accountings (if prepared under generally accepted accounting principles) and new accountings only for years without adequate prior accountings.
The court holds that the trial court's order requires only copies of prior accountings furnished in prior years (if prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles) and new original accountings only for remaining years when no adequate accountings were furnished. The cost-sharing provision means each party will pay one-half of the accounting expense currently, with ultimate responsibility to be determined at trial's end through cost taxation.
[1] A partial summary judgment directing an accounting is proper when a party seeks an accounting and distribution of partnership assets.
[2] A court order directing an accounting requires the production of prior accountings if prepared according to generally accepted accounting principles, and new accountings…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the order requires only copies of the prior accountings furnished appellee in prior years, providing they have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and new original accountings only for the remaining years when no adequate accountings were furnished.”
Establishes the court's interpretation that prior accountings satisfying professional standards may be used, avoiding unnecessary re-auditing.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBurning Foot, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership, was sued by Dr. Richard D. Hoover seeking an accounting and distribution of partnership assets. The…
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 Partial Summary Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In a suit between the parties, wherein appellee sought an accounting and a distribution of partnership assets, the trial judge entered a partial summary judgment for appellee directing appellants to furnish an accounting.
Although the appellate issue framed in the briefs deals mainly with the propriety of the partial summary judgment, it became clear at oral argument that the main complaint against the summary judgment was the differing interpretation placed upon the court’s directives contained therein. The trial court ordered that an accounting be furnished appellee by appellant’s accounting agent for the years 1975 through 1984. It directed the accountant to review the books and records of the corporation and prepare annual income, assets and liability statements for those years in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. This mandate was strongly objected to by appellant because they felt it required entirely new audits and studies of the records for all of those years when the evidence showed, or at least created an issue of fact, that appellant had furnished accountings for several of the years involved.
We disagree with that interpretation of the court’s order and hold that the order requires only copies of the prior account-ings furnished appellee in prior years, providing they have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and new original accountings only for the remaining years when no adequate accountings were furnished.
The court order provided that appellee and Burning Foot were to share the cost of such accountings equally for the time being, the ultimate responsibility therefor to be considered in the taxation of costs at the end of the litigation. We find no ambiguity contained in this aspect of the order. It simply means each of the named parties will pay one-half of the accounting expense now and at the end of the case the court will tax those costs along with other costs as the justice of the case requires.
Having resolved the basic issue between the parties on this appeal, the judgment appealed from is affirmed and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
HERSEY, C.J., and DOWNEY and LETTS, JJ., concur.