[jeff]

REG Resources:

Free REG Notes & Audio – https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-study-plan

REG 10 Point Combo: https://www.another71.com/products-page/ten-point-combo

REG Score Release: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-scores-results-release

Jeff Elliott, CPA (KS) | Another71 | NINJA CPA | NINJA CMA | NINJA CPE

[Skrier]

@Cupcake…not sure if this is helpful for you, but a contract is created for that very reason, a promise of some future service…i.e. I will pay you $500 to cut my grass each Friday in July. Where as to be a holder in due course, consideration must be given to be a holder in due course, meaning value must be given to be a HDC, a future event does not constitute value. T

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[Kenada]

Yes answer is D.

I was thinking why it couldn't be B and thank you Skier/UMCPA .. in my brain I was thinking statute of fraud instead of Limitiations 🙂

Best of Luck OCD !!!!

FAR 05/27/14; 786/110 - Done !

[Kenada]

Yes answer is D.

I was thinking why it couldn't be B and thank you Skier/UMCPA .. in my brain I was thinking statute of fraud instead of Limitiations 🙂

Best of Luck OCD !!!!

FAR 05/27/14; 786/110 - Done !

[Kenada]

@ Cupcake

I thought for a contract you need to have future performance and not past performance.

In HDC you can give consideration that less than the commercial paper for a past or future performance. It just have to meet the negligible requirements for it to be passed on.

Am I going nuts here?

FAR 05/27/14; 786/110 - Done !

[Kenada]

@ Cupcake

I thought for a contract you need to have future performance and not past performance.

In HDC you can give consideration that less than the commercial paper for a past or future performance. It just have to meet the negligible requirements for it to be passed on.

Am I going nuts here?

FAR 05/27/14; 786/110 - Done !

[Kenada]

I really hate these questions – Not because i don't know them but i am over thinking it now.

So if my understanding is correctly a P/Ship will dissolve if

1. Partner leaving has more than 50%

2. Partner is leaving and now its just one person instead of two

3. They all agree to dissolve.

Right?

So in this question it doesn't tell me if he has more than 50% .. I would go with the assumption PLW = 3 partners and they all have 1/3 share and that they are 3 partners. I picked Answer C that it would cause a dissolution but my logic above then doesn't make sense.

What would you guys do in a question like this? I feel like i am commingling the rules now 🙁

Wind, who has been a partner in the PLW general partnership for 4 years, decides to withdraw from the partnership despite a written partnership agreement that states, “No partner may withdraw for a period of 5 years.” Under the Revised Uniform Partnership Act (RUPA), what is the result of Wind’s withdrawal?

A. Wind’s withdrawal is not effective until Wind obtains a court-ordered decree of dissolution.

B. Wind’s withdrawal causes a dissolution of the partnership by operation of law.

C. Wind’s withdrawal causes dissociation from the partnership despite being in violation of the partnership agreement.

D. Wind’s withdrawal has no bearing on the continued operation of the partnership by the remaining partners.

FAR 05/27/14; 786/110 - Done !

[Kenada]

I really hate these questions – Not because i don't know them but i am over thinking it now.

So if my understanding is correctly a P/Ship will dissolve if

1. Partner leaving has more than 50%

2. Partner is leaving and now its just one person instead of two

3. They all agree to dissolve.

Right?

So in this question it doesn't tell me if he has more than 50% .. I would go with the assumption PLW = 3 partners and they all have 1/3 share and that they are 3 partners. I picked Answer C that it would cause a dissolution but my logic above then doesn't make sense.

What would you guys do in a question like this? I feel like i am commingling the rules now 🙁

Wind, who has been a partner in the PLW general partnership for 4 years, decides to withdraw from the partnership despite a written partnership agreement that states, “No partner may withdraw for a period of 5 years.” Under the Revised Uniform Partnership Act (RUPA), what is the result of Wind’s withdrawal?

A. Wind’s withdrawal is not effective until Wind obtains a court-ordered decree of dissolution.

B. Wind’s withdrawal causes a dissolution of the partnership by operation of law.

C. Wind’s withdrawal causes dissociation from the partnership despite being in violation of the partnership agreement.

D. Wind’s withdrawal has no bearing on the continued operation of the partnership by the remaining partners.

FAR 05/27/14; 786/110 - Done !

[Kenada]

Can anyone tell me why B is a better answer than A. I thought for partnership it needs to be in Writing if they deal in real estate no matter what the amount. I know B is also right as if it lasts over a year it also needs to be in writing.

Which of the following statements about the form of a general partnership agreement is true?

A. It could not be oral if the partnership would deal in real estate.

B. It must be in writing if the partnership is to last for longer than 1 year.

C. It must be in writing if partnership profits would not be equally divided.

D. It must be in writing if any partner contributes more than $500 in capital.

Answer (B) is correct.

Most oral agreements to enter into a partnership are valid. If the partnership agreement is for a definite period in excess of 1 year, however, the majority of states require that the partnership agreement be in writing to be enforceable. If the statute of frauds is not complied with, a partnership at will results.

FAR 05/27/14; 786/110 - Done !

[Kenada]

Can anyone tell me why B is a better answer than A. I thought for partnership it needs to be in Writing if they deal in real estate no matter what the amount. I know B is also right as if it lasts over a year it also needs to be in writing.

Which of the following statements about the form of a general partnership agreement is true?

A. It could not be oral if the partnership would deal in real estate.

B. It must be in writing if the partnership is to last for longer than 1 year.

C. It must be in writing if partnership profits would not be equally divided.

D. It must be in writing if any partner contributes more than $500 in capital.

Answer (B) is correct.

Most oral agreements to enter into a partnership are valid. If the partnership agreement is for a definite period in excess of 1 year, however, the majority of states require that the partnership agreement be in writing to be enforceable. If the statute of frauds is not complied with, a partnership at will results.

FAR 05/27/14; 786/110 - Done !

[Anonymous]

@skirer You are completely right. Thanks for bringing back up to a higher level. A future performance is the reason you make a contract! Thanks. Sometimes I get so lost in the details.

[Anonymous]

@skirer You are completely right. Thanks for bringing back up to a higher level. A future performance is the reason you make a contract! Thanks. Sometimes I get so lost in the details.

[Skrier]

@IY247….I partnership agreement does not need to be in writing if it is to own land. It does require a writing if the partnership is to last longer than 1 year.

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[Skrier]

@IY247….I partnership agreement does not need to be in writing if it is to own land. It does require a writing if the partnership is to last longer than 1 year.

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[UCMCPA]

IY247, I would guess D in the first one. As for the second question, I had a similar example once and it read that they “could be” dealing in real estate. The answer was B because a year plus is always required in writing and the fact that they “could” or “would” be dealing with real estate. Also, real estate could be buildings and not just land, (mylegs).?

FAR - 84
AUD - 94
REG - 86
BEC - 86

[UCMCPA]

IY247, I would guess D in the first one. As for the second question, I had a similar example once and it read that they “could be” dealing in real estate. The answer was B because a year plus is always required in writing and the fact that they “could” or “would” be dealing with real estate. Also, real estate could be buildings and not just land, (mylegs).?

FAR - 84
AUD - 94
REG - 86
BEC - 86

[Author]

Replies