R. K. COOPER, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANT,
v.
ALAN D. FULTON, APPELLEE; R. K. COOPER, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT, V. ALAN D. FULTON, 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.
This case involves an appeal from an interlocutory decree that established a partnership between the plaintiff, Alan D. Fulton, and the defendants, R. K. Cooper and R. K. Cooper, Inc. The court affirmed the decree, finding sufficient evidence to support the existence of the partnership and Fulton's entitlement to an accounting of profits.
Yes, a partnership existed between Fulton and the Coopers, and Fulton is entitled to an accounting of 50% of the net profits of the insurance department for the period the relationship existed.
“that a partnership relation existed in this case between the plaintiff (Alan D. Fulton) and the defendants (R. K. Cooper, individually, and R. K. Cooper, Inc.), which partnership commenced on or about July 1, 1952, and terminated on or about October 6, 1958, when the plaintiff was excluded from the business.”
This quote describes the core finding of the interlocutory decree being appealed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAlan D. Fulton established an insurance department within R. K. Cooper, Inc. at the invitation of R. K. Cooper. Fulton was to receive 50% of the net p…
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 Accounting For Profits cases and more on FLexlaw
Both of the appellants in the above causes appeal from the same interlocutory decree adjudicating “ * * * that a partnership relation existed in this case between the plaintiff (Alan D. Fulton) and the defendants (R. K. Cooper, individually, and R. K. Cooper, Inc.), which partnership commenced on or about July 1, 1952, and terminated on or about October 6, 1958, when the plaintiff was excluded from the business. The partnership between Alan D, Fulton and R. K. Cooper consisted of an insurance agency which was operated by and through the defendant, R. K. Cooper, Inc.”
*617An examination of the record discloses substantial, competent evidence to support this decree. It reveals that Fulton established the insurance department of R. K. Cooper, Inc. with his insurance contacts at the invitation of R. K. Cooper, individually, and was to receive fifty (50%) per cent of the net profits of this department. He was in sole charge of the insurance department of R. K. Cooper, Inc., and he suffered a charge against his earnings of fifty (50%) per cent of the expenses or losses incurred in the operation of this department.
Therefore, he is entitled to an accounting of fifty (50%) per cent of the net profits of the insurance department of the appellant, R. K. Cooper, Inc., of and from the appellants for the period the relationship existed.
The interlocutory decree to account is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cooper v. Fulton, 158 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)…ss. The partnership between Alan D. Fulton and R. K. Cooper consisted of an insurance agency which was operated by and through the defendant, R. K. Cooper, Inc.” This interlocutory decree was affirmed by this Court. Cooper v. Fulton, Fla.App. 1961, 132 So. 2d 616. Thereafter, the cause was referred to a special master who heard the evidence presented and recommended a decree for the plaintiff. The first recommendation of the special master as to the-amount to be awarded the plaintiff was as follows: “I reco…1 / 3
-
Oren W. Shaffer v. Ross, 143 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)…itted shows a failure to prove a mutuality of interest in the profits and losses; therefore the chancellor correctly concluded that a partnership was not proved. Stevens v. McKibbin, 68 F. 406, 411 (5th Cir.1895). See Cooper v. Fulton, Fla.App.1961, 132 So. 2d 616. Affirmed.…