Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rutherford v. Darwin

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided June 24, 1980No. 4108Published

1DissentSutin, Judge

I dissent.

Tom Darwin was the general partner of two limited partnerships — Rancho Village Partners, Ltd. and The Settlement, Ltd. Each business of the partnership was under the full and exclusive control and management of Darwin. Each partnership had a demand deposit account at the First National Bank. Rancho Village’s account number was 19138062; that of The Settlement was 393410222.

Plaintiffs Rutherford and Larkin were limited partners. Rutherford was Darwin’s father-in-law. The acrimony with which Rutherford attacked Darwin in deposition testimony casts serious doubt as to the credibility…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Underpinning & Foundation Constructors, Inc. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.New York Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. Clovis National Bank v. ThomasNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Von Gohren v. Pacific National BankCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1973
  4. Swiss Baco Skyline Logging, Inc. v. HaliewiczCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1977
  5. Continental Bank v. Wa-Ho Truck BrokerageCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1979

12 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