Buchman v. Canard

As the majority opinion states, Nancy Canard was awarded one-third of Robert Buchman’s real property (which was declared to be a partnership asset) and also was awarded an amount equal to her share of the partnership assets. Buchman has argued that this, in effect, allows Canard to double-dip. I agree that the issues raised on appeal have no merit based on the law of the case..

Buchman is basically arguing that the arbitration award erroneously awarded Nancy Canard her share in the partnership assets which Buchman wrongfully *393transferred (the evidence reflected that Buchman had used partnership…