Legal Opinion · Dissent

McCabe v. McCabe

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 10, 1990No. 159 E.D. Appeal Docket 1988Published

1Dissent

LARSEN, Justice.

I vigorously dissent.

Today, the majority effectively precludes the equitable distribution of a partner’s interest in partnership assets which interest can be reached by all of that partner’s creditors. The only person who now cannot reach this interest, which is usually the main asset of a marriage where a partnership interest exists, is the spouse of that partner. Thus, by contract, a spouse who holds an interest in partnership property is able to usurp the statutory laws of equitable distribution, and there will now be a stampede to tie one’s assets up in a “marital…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Young v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. In the Matter of Gary Lee Newman, Debtor. E.A. Martin MacHinery Co. v. Thomas L. Williams, TrusteeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1989
  3. Hodge v. HodgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  4. Hovis v. HovisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. McCabe v. McCabeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API