D. Veinot

The plaintiff and two defendants were partners in an income property held in trust by one defendant.

After the plaintiff demanded to be bought out, the defendant holding title sold the property to a third party without the plaintiff's consent or full disclosure.

The plaintiff sued for breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, and an accounting, and also sued the real estate agent and brokerage.

The court found the partnership was dissolved by the plaintiff's demand, but fiduciary duties continued.

The title-holding defendant breached his duty of full disclosure but had authority to sell the property to wind up the partnership.

The sale was not improvident.

The court ordered an accounting but dismissed the claims for damages, negligence, and the claims against the real estate agent and brokerage.

The defendant brought a motion for civil contempt against the plaintiff and his co-guardian for failing to file an amended management plan with the Public Guardian and Trustee, as required by a prior court order.

The court applied the three-part test for civil contempt from Carey v. Laiken.

While the order was clear and the respondents had knowledge of it, the court found their failure to comply was an unintentional oversight rather than an intentional breach.

Furthermore, the court exercised its discretion to dismiss the contempt motion, noting it was brought for tactical reasons and caused no damage to the estate.