Opinion ID: 1700164
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: C. 1058-AThe BBC Investment Company

Text: This case began on May 6, 1971, when Bateh filed a bill of complaint to dissolve the BBC Corporation. The assets and liabilities were divided along with those of the B-D Partnership by the single decree issued on August 31, 1971, Bateh appealed the in-kind distribution ordered. As error Brown assign the same actions of Judge Barber as in the partnership case. Bateh informs us that there are no creditors of the corporation whose claims were divided between the shareholders, Brown and Bateh. All the creditors whose claims have been divided are creditors of the B-D Partnership. Further, Bateh avers in his Second Amendment to Motion to Dismiss Appeals that Brown has admitted that BBC has been dissolved and there are no creditors who have any remaining claims. No matter. More important is that Brown, in a cross-bill of complaint and answer filed May 30, 1973, has asseverated it would be in the best interest of the BBC shareholders for the realty to be partitioned . . . after provision is made by the court for the payment, or by consent of the creditor-mortgagees a division of the debt and division of collateral, and payment of other outstanding debts of the partnership to third parties.  (Emphasis added.) Judge Barber, it can be seen, gave Brown exactly what he asked for. There can be no complaint on this issue, that the realty was partitioned. Bateh, it is to be remembered, was the party originally opposing an in-kind distribution, but he has waived his objection to such a distribution. The only remaining question is whether or not there is evidence properly at hand to show that the division was equitable. We believe there is and feel that Brown has been bound by his pleadings and his conduct in availing himself of the assets awarded him under the decree. He has acquiesced in the distribution scheme and waived his rights to complain.