In Urbain v.Beierling,the case in the text,why did the court hold that the defendants did not breach the partnership agreement when they dissolved the partnership?
A)The partnership agreement did not set forth a specific term.
B)The partnership agreement only required a majority vote.
C)The RUPA only required a majority vote.
D)The RUPA allows the parties to take such action when a dispute arises.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Since there was no specific term set forth in the partnership agreement,which was open-ended about the partnership's undertakings with regard to developing websites then and in the future,the partnership could be dissolved by the express will of any partner pursuant to the UPA.Accordingly,the court held that neither Clinesmith nor Beierling breached the partnership agreement when they dissolved the partnership,and the trial court properly granted summary disposition for defendants on plaintiff's claim alleging breach of the partnership agreement.

In Urbain V