Professional Documents
Culture Documents
LYTLE
Attorney at Law 84430
2 15028 Prairie Avenue
Hawthorne, California 90250
3 Attorney for Plaintiff
Dewayne Abernathy
4
9
DEWAYNE ABERNATHY, Case No.
10 Plaintiff,
Vs. Complaint for Partnership Dissolution,
Accounting, Receiver, Injunction,
11 DAVID A. FISHER AND DOES 1-10 Breach of\Fiduciary Duty, Partnership,
Defendant. Etc.
12
13
14
Plaintiff complains and alleges as follows:
15 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
17
1. At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiff was and now is a resident of Los Angeles County,
18 California.
2. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant David A. Fisher was and now is a resident of
19 Los Angeles County, California.
3. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendant sued herein as DOES 1
20
through 10, inclusive, and therefore sues these Defendant by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will
21 amend this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when ascertained and believes and
thereon alleges that each of the fictitiously named Defendant is responsible in some manner for
22 the occurrences herein alleged and that Plaintiff's damages as herein alleged were proximately
caused by such occurrences.
23 4. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant, and each of them, were acting as the agents,
principals, employees of - or in concert or conspiracy with - their co-Defendant and were acting
24 within the course and scope of their employment, authority, agency or conspiracy and each
Defendant, by word or conduct, approved, allowed or ratified the acts or omissions to act of
25 each of their co-Defendant.
26
13 5.The only way to get a fair offer for the real property and to end all disputes between the parties is
to dissolve the partnership and sell it.
14
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
15 (Dissolution of Partnership)
AGAINST DEFENDANT
16
6. In or about 1991 at Compton, California Plaintiff and defendant entered into an oral contract
17 whereby they agreed to purchase a restaurant and real property and operate the restaurant for a profit.
7. Plaintiff has performed all terms and conditions of said Contract not excused by defendant's
18 breach.
8. On or about January 2002 and thereafter Defendant breached said contract by failing to
19
account for expenses and income or pay over any profits to Plaintiff.
20
9. As a proximate result of said breach of said contract Plaintiff has been generally damaged in
an unknown amount.
21 10. As a proximate result of said breach Plaintiff has been further specially damaged in an
unknown amount.
22
14. Numerous acts and courses of conduct by defendant(s) or other facts warranting dissolution
23 under Corp. Code § 15032, e.g., Since thecommencement of the partnership, disagreements and
disputes have arisen between plaintiff and defendant _________ (name ) regarding matters of policy
24 in the operation of the partnership business.
25 Defendant has on several occasions appropriated sums of MONEY from partnership funds to his/her
own use, without plaintiff's knowledge,
26
5 6. Defendant is in possession of the partnership books, assets, and accounts. The amount of
partnership assets and liabilities is unknown to plaintiff and cannot be ascertained without an
6 accounting of profits and losses that occurred during the operation of the partnership business.
7 7. The partnership agreement provides that are to be divided between plaintiff and defendant equally.
8. Plaintiff has demanded an accounting but defendant (has or have) failed and refused, and
8 continue(s) to refuse to settle accounts and divide partnership assets and liabilities with plaintiff.
9 9. Unless a receiver is appointed by the court to take possession of, care for, manage, and operate the
partnership assets and property, such property and assets are in danger of being lost, removed, or
10 materially destroyed, in that defendant is in control of the partnership business, and was and is
applying partnership funds to his/her own use, in excess of his/her interest in the partnership
11
business)].
12
15 11. In addition to the general allegations Plaintiff refers to the allegations of the first cause of
action and makes them a part hereof.
16 12. Defendant had a fiduciary duty to Plaintiff by reason of their joint ownership and agreement.
13. Defendant breached that duty by deliberately refusing to account to Plaintiff or distributing
17 any profits to petitioner.
14. As a proximate result of said breach of said contract Plaintiff has been generally damaged in
18 an unknown amount.
15. As a proximate result of said breach Plaintiff has been further specially damaged in an
19
unknown amount.
20
16. By reason of Defendant's breach of fiduciary duty which was only motivated solely by has
quest for profit without regard for petitioner's economic or emotional well-being, Plaintiff are
21 entitled to exemplary punitive damages in the sum of $50,000.
24 17. In addition to the general allegations Plaintiff refers to the allegations of the first and second
cause(s) of action and makes them a part hereof.
25 18. Plaintiff and defendant are now, and for a period of have been, partners or joint venturers
engaged in the business in Compton, California, of operating Naka's Broiler restaurant.
26
22 5. For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper.
23
Dated: June 20, 2007
24
25 ______________________________
CRAIG M. LYTLE
26
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26