Just because the Supreme Court isn’t formally conferencing this week doesn’t mean it can’t take actions usually saved for conferences.
One such action was Monday’s dismissal of review in Han v. Hallberg. The court had agreed to hear the case a year ago and limited the issues to: “Can a trust be a partner in a partnership? Does the death of a partner who has transferred his partnership interest into a trust trigger the buyout-on-death term in the partnership agreement?” [Disclosure: Horvitz & Levy is appellate counsel for defendant Hallberg.]
The case was fully briefed when Hallberg moved to dismiss review. The court granted the motion “[i]n light of appellants’ concession that ‘[a]n ordinary express trust can be a general partner.’ ”
Under rule 8.1115(e)(2), because of the dismissal of review, the Court of Appeal’s published opinion is again “citable and has binding or precedential effect.” The Second District, Division Eight, disagreed with a 2009 decision by the Fourth District, Division Three, and held that, “[w]hile a trust cannot act in its own name and must always act through its trustee, a trust is a ‘person’ that may associate in a partnership” and that the trust continues to be a partner in the partnership after the former partner/trustee’s death.
The court might have held off ruling on the motion until its next regularly scheduled conference a week from today had Monday not been Justice Ming Chin’s last day on the court.