Case ID: or-app_40/html/0749-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      LEE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued March 26,
    affirmed June 25, 1979
    HIATT, Respondent, v. TONISSEN, Appellant.
    
    (No. 102367, CA No. 11096)
    596 P2d 597
    James N. Westwood, Portland, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief were Harvey C. Barragar and Miller, Anderson, Nash Yerke & Wiener, Portland.
    Tony Pizzuti, Canby, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Clifford L. Freeman, Portland.
    Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Lee, Buttler, and Joseph, Judges.
    LEE, J.
   LEE, J.

Plaintiff brought suit in equity for termination of a partnership and for an accounting. The court found for plaintiff.

In its decree, the court declared a certain parcel of real property to be a partnership asset in which plaintiff and defendant owned undivided one-half interests as tenants in common. All other assets of the partnership were also equally divided between plaintiff and defendant. Defendant contends that the trial court erred in failing to grant his counterclaim for rescission of the partnership agreement, or, in the alternative, in failing to expressly provide for repayment of the capital contribution of each partner prior to division of assets.

On de novo review, we have determined that the evidence supports the trial court decree dissolving the partnership and dividing the partnership assets equally. No useful purpose would be served in detailing the evidence here. Cascade Broadcasting Corporation v. Erland, 38 Or App 165, 589 P2d 750 (1979).

Affirmed.