Title
Bonnevie vs. Herdez
Case
G.R. No. L-5837
Decision Date
May 31, 1954
Partnership formed to acquire Meralco properties dissolved after withdrawal of members; plaintiffs sued for profits but lost, as no actual profit was realized and withdrawal settled claims.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 28028)

Partnership Formation and Operations

Prior to January 1947, the plaintiffs and associates formed a secret partnership to acquire Meralco properties. The partnership lacked formal articles of incorporation, with plans to create a corporation once the acquisition was complete. Pedro Serranzana and David Serrano were designated as general manager and secretary-treasurer, respectively. After efforts to negotiate the purchase stagnated, the defendant, Hernandez, joined the partnership to facilitate the deal and was given power of attorney.

Acquisition Details

Using partnership funds, Hernandez successfully purchased Meralco properties for P122,000, with payment terms that included a down payment and installment payments supported by a penalty clause for nonpayment. Despite being the vendee named in the deed, the properties were acquired for the partnership, which subsequently assumed control of the business.

Partnership Dissolution

Tensions arose, leading some partners, including plaintiffs and Judge Jaime Reyes, to withdraw from the partnership due to dissatisfaction with management and concerns about financial liabilities. A resolution was proposed at a meeting on April 10, 1947, allowing partners to withdraw and receive their contributions back, which was subsequently approved. The following day, plaintiffs and Judge Reyes were refunded their investments, and the partnership was officially dissolved.

Formation of the Corporation

Following the dissolution, remaining partners continued to form a new corporation, the Bicol Electric Company, which took over the Meralco properties. The assets were assigned a high book value, and despite initial losses in operations, the corporation later prospered. Two years after the dissolution, the plaintiffs sought to claim a share of the alleged profits from the corporate assignment.

Legal Proceedings and Issues

Plaintiffs claimed that Hernandez made profits from the assignment of the Meralco properties, seeking P115,312.50 as their share. However, the defendant contended that no profits had been realized, pointing out that any gain from the share subscriptions was not cash received directly. The lower court found no profit from the assignment and dismissed the complaint, asserting that the plaintiffs ceased to have interest after their withdrawal from the partnership.

Appeal and Court's Findings

On appeal, the court affirmed the lower court's decision, emphasizing that the profits

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.