O'Neill v. Boden-Wert Real Estate USA Fonds I, Ltd.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

O'Neill v. Boden-Wert Real Estate USA Fonds I, Ltd.

599 So. 2d 1045, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5796, 1992 WL 112128

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 27, 1992

DocketNo. 91-01361

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 599 So. 2d 1045 (O'Neill v. Boden-Wert Real Estate USA Fonds I, Ltd.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

O'Neill v. Boden-Wert Real Estate USA Fonds I, Ltd., 599 So. 2d 1045, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5796, 1992 WL 112128 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

LEHAN, Judge.

We affirm the final judgment against appellants in this suit upon a mortgage note. One of the appellants, Boden-Wert IV, is a general partner of Royal Palm Square Associates, a general partnership which is in a chapter 11 reorganization. The other is Patrick J. O’Neill, a general partner of Boden-Wert IV.

Contrary to appellants’ contention, the automatic stay of proceedings against the chapter 11 partnership under 11 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq. did not apply to appellants. See Bank Center Ltd. v. Papariella, 15 B.R. 64 (Bankr.W.D.Pa.1981); In re Aboussie Bros. Construction Co., 8 B.R. 302 (Bankr.E.D.Mo.1981). Liability of a general partner exists independently of partnership liability. See §§ 620.09(1) and 620.63, Fla.Stat. (1985). See also In re Alton, 81 B.R. 97, 99 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1987); 8 Fla.Jur.2d Business Relationships §§ 513, 659 (1978). Appellants apparently [1046]*1046did not request a stay of proceedings against them pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 105(a).

We do not find merit in appellants’ additional contentions.

Affirmed.

SCHOONOVER, C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

LEHAN, Judge.

We affirm the final judgment against appellants in this suit upon a mortgage note. One of the appellants, Boden-Wert IV, is a general partner of Royal Palm Square Associates, a general partnership which is in a chapter 11 reorganization. The other is Patrick J. O’Neill, a general partner of Boden-Wert IV.

Contrary to appellants’ contention, the automatic stay of proceedings against the chapter 11 partnership under 11 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq. did not apply to appellants. See Bank Center Ltd. v. Papariella, 15 B.R. 64 (Bankr.W.D.Pa.1981); In re Aboussie Bros. Construction Co., 8 B.R. 302 (Bankr.E.D.Mo.1981). Liability of a general partner exists independently of partnership liability. See §§ 620.09(1) and 620.63, Fla.Stat. (1985). See also In re Alton, 81 B.R. 97, 99 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1987); 8 Fla.Jur.2d Business Relationships §§ 513, 659 (1978). Appellants apparently [1046]*1046did not request a stay of proceedings against them pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 105(a).

We do not find merit in appellants’ additional contentions.

Affirmed.

SCHOONOVER, C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

599 So. 2d 1045, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5796, 1992 WL 112128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oneill-v-boden-wert-real-estate-usa-fonds-i-ltd-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack