Difference between revisions of "Utah joint venture"

From Lawpendium
Jump to: navigation, search
Banner Ad photo UtahWillsBannerAdforLawpendiumPhotoshop_zpscc99065d.png
(Created page with "Joint venture: As a general rule, in order for a joint venture to exist there must be: (1) a community of interest in the performance of the common purpose; (2) a joint propri...")
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
Joint venture: As a general rule, in order for a joint venture to exist there must be: (1) a community of interest in the performance of the common purpose; (2) a joint proprietary interest in the subject matter; (3) a mutual right to control; (4) a right to share in the profits; and (5) unless there is an agreement to the contrary, a duty to share in any losses which may be sustained.
+
Joint venture: As a general rule, in order for a joint venture to exist there must be:  
 +
 
 +
# a community of interest in the performance of the common purpose;  
 +
# a joint proprietary interest in the subject matter;  
 +
# a mutual right to control;  
 +
# a right to share in the profits; and  
 +
# unless there is an agreement to the contrary, a duty to share in any losses which may be sustained.
  
 
[http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=Ellsworth+Paulsen+Const.+Co.+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,45&case=502772107124324942&scilh=0 Ellsworth Paulsen Const. Co. v. 51-SPR-L.L.C., 2008 UT 28, 183 P.3d 248]
 
[http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=Ellsworth+Paulsen+Const.+Co.+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,45&case=502772107124324942&scilh=0 Ellsworth Paulsen Const. Co. v. 51-SPR-L.L.C., 2008 UT 28, 183 P.3d 248]

Latest revision as of 03:59, 20 January 2015

Joint venture: As a general rule, in order for a joint venture to exist there must be:

  1. a community of interest in the performance of the common purpose;
  2. a joint proprietary interest in the subject matter;
  3. a mutual right to control;
  4. a right to share in the profits; and
  5. unless there is an agreement to the contrary, a duty to share in any losses which may be sustained.

Ellsworth Paulsen Const. Co. v. 51-SPR-L.L.C., 2008 UT 28, 183 P.3d 248