From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kanarek v. Gadlex Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 16, 1985
115 A.D.2d 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

December 16, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dachenhausen, J.).


Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to plaintiffs' contentions on this appeal, based upon our review of the record, we agree with the trial court that defendant Dennis Katz properly assigned his interest in defendant Gadlex Associates, a limited partnership, to two of the limited partners without the prior consent of the remaining partners while continuing to serve and perform the functions of his position as the sole general partner. Further, there is no requirement under Gadlex Associates' certificate of limited partnership or under the New York Partnership Law that a general partner must first offer his interest in the limited partnership to all the partners before he may assign it to a particular partner.

A general partner in a limited partnership has all of the rights and powers and is "subject to all the restrictions and liabilities of a partner in a partnership without limited partners", with limited exceptions not relevant to this case (Partnership Law, § 98). His interest as a general partner in the limited partnership is personalty and freely assignable. Moreover, such assignment can be made without the consent of the other partners "but the assignee is entitled only to receive the profits of the assigning partner" (Rapoport v 55 Perry Co., 50 A.D.2d 54, 57). As stated by the trial court, the "assignment does not of itself dissolve the partnership nor result in the assignee becoming a substituted general partner" (Partnership Law § 53).

We find no evidence in the record to support plaintiffs' contention that defendant Dennis Katz retired or resigned as sole general partner warranting a dissolution of the partnership. Nor is there any merit to their assertion that the sole general partner breached his fiduciary duty when he entered into a second prime lease on behalf of the partnership with defendant Greenspan Jaffe concerning the partnership's real property.

Finally, we agree with the trial court's determination awarding possession of the subject real property occupied by plaintiff Herbert Kanarek to defendant Greenspan Jaffe, the prime tenant, and granting judgment in favor of defendant Gadlex Associates on its counterclaims for capital contributions against each of the plaintiffs. Gibbons, J.P., Bracken, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Kanarek v. Gadlex Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 16, 1985
115 A.D.2d 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

Kanarek v. Gadlex Associates

Case Details

Full title:HERBERT KANAREK et al., Appellants, v. GADLEX ASSOCIATES et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 16, 1985

Citations

115 A.D.2d 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
496 N.Y.S.2d 253

Citing Cases

Whalen v. Gerzof

Neither plaintiff's unsubstantiated allegations (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, supra; Denton Publs. v…

Kydd v. Kydd Invs.

RCW 25.05.210(2)(a).See Warren v. Warren, 12 Ark.App. 260, 675 S.W.2d 371 (1984) (assignee is not personally…