The case involved a minor who, with his guardian's consent, entered into a partnership for an upholstering and furniture business and sought to renounce the partnership during minority, requesting a receiver to manage firm assets and return his investment preferentially before paying partnership debts. The court decided that a receiver should be appointed to dissolve the firm and distribute assets first to costs, then to firm creditors, and any surplus to the partners, denying the minor priority on his investment. The reasoning was that while the minor could disaffirm the partnership agreement, by petitioning the court to treat the remaining goods as partnership assets, he effectively ratified the underlying purchases, obligating those assets to satisfy firm debts as in any partnership dissolution.

business & regulatoryfamily lawprocedure