November 10, 1988

In the Matter of a Mail Dispute Between:

JOHN G. BLACK

and

KATHLEEN A. REIMER

P.S. Docket No. MD-38

INITIAL DECISION

            This mail dispute mater has been docketed pursuant to Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) §153.72 and 39 C.F.R. Part 965, which require Regional Counsel to forward certain unresolved mail disputes to this Department for decision.  The mail in dispute is presently being held by the Postmaster, Des Moines, Iowa, pending final resolution of this matter.  Both parties (Messrs. Black and Goldman, and Ms. Reimer) have filed the submittals required by the rules of practice and Mr. Black (on behalf of himself and Mr. Goldman) and Ms. Reimer have responded with comments permitted thereby.

FINDINGS OF FACT

            1.         The mail in dispute is that addressed to the law firm of Black, Reimer & Goldman, at 550 Thirty-Ninth Street, Suite 300, Des Moines, Iowa  50312.

            2.         In August 1982, the three disputants formed a partnership for the practice of law with each having an equal one-third interest in the partnership.  There is no written partnership agreement.

            3.         On or about July 31, 1988, the partners agreed to the dissolution of the partnership.  All parties agree that the operation and dissolution of the partnership were subject to the provisions of the Iowa Uniform Partnership Law at Section 544 of the Iowa Code.

            4.         Upon dissolution, all of the partners moved their offices to locations other than 550 Thirty-Ninth Street, Des Moines, Iowa, with Messrs. Black and Goldman continuing to practice together.  The partners have issued conflicting directions to the Postmaster regarding the forwarding of mail addressed to the partnership (as distinct from mail addressed to an individual partner) at the Thirty-Ninth Street address.  Messrs. Black and Goldman have directed that such mail be forwarded to their new address and Ms. Reimer has directed that the mail be forwarded to hers.

            5.         On at least one occasion the parties met at the post office and divided the mail.  However, they have been unable to agree to any procedure to continue doing so.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

            Ordinarily, an addressee may control delivery of its mail.  In the absence of a contrary order, mail is delivered as addressed.  DMM §153.11.a.  In this instance conflicting contrary orders have been issued by the partners of a partnership which has been subject to dissolution.

            Under the Iowa Uniform Partnership Law, dissolution of a partnership does not cause its immediate termination.  Termination occurs only after winding up of partnership affairs is completed.  See Gibson v. Deuth, 270 N.W.2d 632 (Iowa 1978); Iowa Code Ann. §§544.29, 544.30 (West 1987).  Following dissolution, the authority of a partner to act for the partnership and to bind the partnership continues at least as to matters necessary to wind up the partnership.  Iowa Code Ann. §§544.33, 544.35.  Differences among the partners as to ordinary business matters are to be decided by a majority of the partners.  Id., §544.18.

            I conclude that directing the forwarding of mail is an ordinary business matter subject to the direction of the majority of partners.  Therefore, based on these provisions, and in the absence of contrary direction in the Domestic Mail Manual, mail should be delivered as directed by a majority of the partners - in this case, Messrs. Black and Goldman.

            The attached mail delivery instruction to the Postmaster should be issued.

                                                                                                David I. Brochstein

                                                                                                Administrative Judge