Legal Opinion

Stefanski v. Gonnella

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided March 21, 1983PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.

Among several accounting matters which required resolution upon the winding up of their two-man partnership, the ones that count for purposes of this litigation are whether the plaintiff, Stefanski, was entitled to a distribution for good will and, if so, how much.

Ironically, the purpose for which the parties formed the partnership was to practice accounting. Stefanski and his erstwhile partner, the defendant Gonnella, became acquainted in 1966 while they were students at the University of Massachusetts. They did not team up until 1977. In the meantime Stefanski worked in Minnesota for the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. In Re the Accounting of BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
  2. Moore v. RawsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
  3. Foss v. RobyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  4. Murray v. BatemanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  5. Rutan v. CoolidgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Smith, Keller & Associates v. Dorr & AssociatesWyoming Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Spayd v. TurnerOhio Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Detter v. Miracle Hills Animal Hosp., PCNebraska Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Donahue v. DraperMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1986
  5. Marchand v. MurrayMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1989

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API