Filters
Question type

Study Flashcards

In winding up a general partnership, creditors are paid before partners receive their capital contributions.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

A majority of the states treat a partnership as an entity for most purposes.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

True

Rita and Salvatore do business as Tech Fixers, a partnership. In most states, for the purposes of collecting judgments and having accounting performed, this firm would be treated as


A) ​an aggregate of individuals.
B) ​a person.
C) ​an entity.
D) ​a non-entity.

E) A) and B)
F) C) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Kim and Lyle are partners in K&L Sales, which exports technical equipment. If Congress declares that the equipment can no longer be exported, K&L


A) ​can continue its business for one twelve-month period.
B) ​can continue its business indefinitely.
C) ​dissolves immediately unless the partners change its business.
D) ​is immediately subject to criminal prosecution and penalties.

E) A) and B)
F) A) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

In a general partnership, the acts of one partner in the ordinary course of business can subject the other partners to personal liability.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Unlike most agents, each partner in a partnership has an ownership interest in the business.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Fact Pattern 37-2 Kristin and Lindsey are partners in Mobile Devise, an online marketing firm. -Refer to Fact Pattern 37-2. Lindsey dissociates from Mobile. Kristin signs a contract with Organic Olives, a food seller, apparently on Mobile's behalf. Organic Olives does not know of Lindsey's dissociation. The contract is binding on


A) ​Kristin, Lindsey, and Mobile.
B) ​Kristin only.
C) ​Mobile only.
D) ​Organic Olives only.

E) A) and C)
F) A) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Nell is considering forms of business organization for Optic Center, a medical eye clinic. An advantage of a limited liability partnership is that, depending on the applicable state statute, partners can avoid personal liability for


A) ​their own wrongful acts.
B) ​any partnership obligation.
C) ​their own and other partners' wrongful acts.
D) ​none of the choices.

E) A) and B)
F) A) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Beth and Connie do business as Diamond Investments. In acting on the firm's behalf, Beth makes an honest error in overestimating the value of a particular stock purchase. To her firm, Beth is


A) ​liable for breach of the duty of care.
B) ​liable for breach of the duty of accounting.
C) ​liable for breach of the duty of loyalty.
D) ​not liable.

E) All of the above
F) A) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Withdrawal from a partnership before the end of its express term constitutes a breach of the partnership agreement.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Stefani and Tyler agree in an exchange of e-mail to form a partnership to buy and sell real property. Their partnership agreement is legally binding


A) ​only if a copy of the agreement is filed in the appropriate state office.
B) ​only if the agreement is printed in hard copy and signed by the parties.
C) ​only if the parties exchange valid consideration.
D) ​without more.

E) All of the above
F) C) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

If no fixed duration of the partnership is specified, the partnership is a partnership at will, which means that it cannot be dissolved.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Orlando is a limited partner in Port of Call Exports, a limited partnership. By participating in the firm's management, Orlando is liable for its obligations


A) ​in proportion to the number of partners in the firm.
B) ​to no extent.
C) ​to the extent of his capital contribution to the firm.
D) ​to the full extent.

E) A) and D)
F) None of the above

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Kay and Linda decide to do business as Marketing & Promotion. To be a partnership, this association can result from an agreement that is


A) ​express, but not implied.
B) ​implied, but not express.
C) ​oral, written, or implied by conduct.
D) ​written, but not oral or implied.

E) C) and D)
F) B) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Brad and Carol are partners in Doctors for Children, a medical clinic. Brad's dissociation from the firm results in


A) ​the automatic termination of the firm's legal existence.
B) ​the partnership's buyout of Brad's interest in the firm.
C) ​the immediate maturity of all partnership debts.
D) ​the temporary suspension of the partnership's business.

E) A) and B)
F) A) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

A limited partnership cannot be dissolved by court decree.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

A third party can never sue one of the partners of a partnership without suing all members of the partnership.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

On a partner's dissociation, his or her right to participate in the management and conduct of the business terminates.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Ed, a partner in Farm Equipment Sales, applies for a loan with Growers Bank allegedly on Farm Equipment's behalf but without the authorization of the other partners. The bank knows that Ed is not authorized to take out the loan. Liability in the event of default will be imposed on


A) ​none of the choices.
B) ​Ed.
C) ​Farm Equipment.
D) ​Growers Bank.

E) B) and D)
F) A) and B)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

B

Sebastian was the manager of Thai Bistro, a restaurant specializing in Southeast Asian foods. Sebastian opened a bank account in Thai Bistro's name, signing the account signature card as "owner." Umeko, who was often at Thai Bistro and had free access to its office, told others that she was "an owner" and "a partner." She also opened a bank account in Thai Bistro's name, and signed the account signature card as "owner." Sebastian told Vijay, the owner of Wong Noodles, Inc., that Umeko was a member of a partnership that owned Thai Bistro. On this basis, Wong Noodles delivered its goods to Thai Bistro on credit. In fact, Thai Bistro was owned by a corporation. When the unpaid account totaled more than $10,000, Wong Noodles filed a suit against Umeko to collect. On what basis might Umeko be liable for the debt?

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

The theory under which Umeko would most likely be liable for Thai Bistro's debt to Wong Noodles is partnership by estoppel. The first requirement of this theory is a representation, by a nonpartner or by another with the nonpartner's consent, that the nonpartner is a partner. The second requirement is reliance on that representation. In this case, Wong Noodles could prove both elements. Both Sebastian and Umeko made representations with respect to Umeko's status in relation to Thai Bistro-they both signed bank cards as "owner," Umeko was often at Thai Bistro and had free access to its office, Umeko told others that she was a "partner" in the business, which is what Sebastian also told Vijay. As for the reliance element, Wong Noodles extended credit to Thai Bistro only because Wong Noodles believed that Thai Bistro was owned by a partnership.

Showing 1 - 20 of 72

Related Exams

Show Answer