Filed: Oct. 26, 2011
Latest Update: Oct. 26, 2011
Summary: Not to be Published PER CURIAM: In this bifurcated action for an accounting, breach of fiduciary duty, and dissolution of a partnership, Appellant Stevie Cartledge argues the special referee erred in finding a partnership existed between the parties. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Verenes v. Alvanos , 387 S.C. 11 , 16, 690 S.E.2d 771 , 773 (2010) ("Characterization of an action as equitable or legal depends on the appellant's main purpose in brin
Summary: Not to be Published PER CURIAM: In this bifurcated action for an accounting, breach of fiduciary duty, and dissolution of a partnership, Appellant Stevie Cartledge argues the special referee erred in finding a partnership existed between the parties. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Verenes v. Alvanos , 387 S.C. 11 , 16, 690 S.E.2d 771 , 773 (2010) ("Characterization of an action as equitable or legal depends on the appellant's main purpose in bring..
More
Not to be Published
PER CURIAM:
In this bifurcated action for an accounting, breach of fiduciary duty, and dissolution of a partnership, Appellant Stevie Cartledge argues the special referee erred in finding a partnership existed between the parties. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Verenes v. Alvanos, 387 S.C. 11, 16, 690 S.E.2d 771, 773 (2010) ("Characterization of an action as equitable or legal depends on the appellant's main purpose in bringing the action.") (internal quotations omitted); Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 386, 709 S.E.2d 650, 654-55 (2011) (providing we will affirm the decision of the trial court in an equity case unless its decision is controlled by some error of law or the appellant satisfies this court that the preponderance of the evidence is against the factual findings of the trial court); Historic Charleston Holdings, LLC v. Mallon, 381 S.C. 417, 427, 673 S.E.2d 448, 453 (2009) ("An action for an accounting sounds in equity."); Tiger, Inc. v. Fisher Agro, Inc., 301 S.C. 229, 237, 391 S.E.2d 538, 543 (1990) (holding an action seeking dissolution of a partnership is one in equity); Bivens v. Watkins, 313 S.C. 228, 230 n.3, 437 S.E.2d 132, 133 n.3 (Ct. App. 1993) (providing an action for breach of fiduciary duty may also sound in equity if the relief sought is equitable);S.C. Code Ann. § 33-41-210 (2006) (defining a "partnership" as "an association of two or more persons to carry on as co-owners a business for profit . . . ."); Corley v. Ott, 326 S.C. 89, 92, 485 S.E.2d 97, 99 (1997) (holding a partnership may be found to exist by implication from the conduct of the parties); Moore v. Moore, 360 S.C. 241, 260, 599 S.E.2d 467, 477 (Ct. App. 2004) (holding one of the most important tests regarding the existence of a partnership is the intention of the parties); id. (holding factors to consider when determining whether a partnership exists include: (1) the sharing of profits and losses; (2) the community of interest in capital or property; and (3) the community of interest in control and management). We find no error of law and we find the factual findings of the court to be supported by the record.1
AFFIRMED.
HUFF, PIEPER and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.
