In the Matter of a Mail Dispute		)	September 19, 1997
Between					)
					)
JIM JOY 				)
					)
	and				)
					)
NICHOLAS A. PYLE			)	P.S. Docket No. MD 97-281

APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT		Jim Joy
    JIM JOY:				140 F Street, SE
					Washington, DC  20003-2603		

APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT		Nicholas A. Pyle
  NICHOLAS A. PYLE:			1223 Potomac Street, NW
					Washington, DC  20007-3212

This mail dispute has been docketed pursuant to Postal Operations Manual (POM 7, August 1, 1996) Section 616.21, which requires the Chief Field Counsel to forward certain unresolved mail disputes to the Judicial Officer for resolution. The mail in dispute is that addressed to H.M.S. BEAGLE GROUP, H.M.S. BEAGLE LOG, and H.M.S. BEAGLE DIRECTORY (hereinafter "Beagle"), 1223 Potomac St., NW, Washington, DC 20007-3212 and 140 F St., SE, Washington, DC 20003-2603. The mail is currently being held by the Washington, DC Postmaster.

Both parties submitted sworn statements and comments (along with other supporting documents), in accordance with 39 C.F.R. §§965.5 and 965.6, in support of their claims. The following findings of fact are based on the parties' submissions and information from the Postal Service that was included in the file referred to the Judicial Officer.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Disputants Nicholas A. Pyle, representing Robert N. Pyle & Associates (Associates), and Jim Joy entered into a partnership on January 13, 1997, "for the operation of a zoology issues newsletter and attendant projects" (Joy Submittal).

2. Under their agreement, Associates agreed to pay Disputant Joy a salary of $400 per week, plus pay for his enrollment in the company's medical insurance, for a period of 90 days, to advance Disputant Joy $2000 to cover out-of-pocket "Beagle" related expenses, and to provide miscellaneous telephone, computer, and general office services. In return, Disputant Joy agreed to turn over all rights to "H.M.S. Beagle" (the zoology issues newsletter), including subscription, advertising and software sale income, from the date of the partnership agreement forward. (Id.).

3. By May 23, 1997, the Disputants had dissolved their partnership, but not before Associates paid out over $32,969.18 in expenditures on behalf of the Beagle newsletter. On June 12, 1997, Associates filed suit against Disputant Joy in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, seeking damages allegedly resulting from Disputant Joy's breach of their partnership agreement. (Joy Submittal; Pyle Rebuttal).

4. On May 28, 1997, Disputant Joy filed for a change of address to have the disputed mail delivered to 140 F St., SE, Washington, DC 20003-2603. Disputant Pyle objected to the change of address, and this mail dispute ensued.

DECISION

Disputant Joy argues that the partnership agreement was for only 90 days or so long as the partners agreed, that the partnership dissolved on May 19, 1997 and that mail intended for the Beagle newsletter once again became his property upon dissolution of the partnership. Disputant Pyle argues that the partnership agreement permanently transferred ownership of the Beagle to Robert N. Pyle and Associates and, therefore, it is the rightful owner of all mail addressed to the Beagle newsletter.

By the terms of their January 13, 1997 agreement, ownership of the Beagle newsletter, "including subscription, advertising and software sales income," was transferred to Robert N. Pyle & Associates in return for specified payments. These payments were made. The transfer was intended to be ". . . from the date of the partnership agreement forward." (Finding of Fact Nos. (FOF) 1, 2). The subsequent dissolution of the partnership did not undo this change in ownership. Valuable consideration was paid for the transfer and there was nothing in the agreement to indicate that ownership of the newsletter was intended to revert to Mr. Joy upon dissolution of the partnership.

Since Robert N. Pyle & Associates currently owns the Beagle newsletter, it is entitled to direct delivery of mail addressed to the newsletter.

This decision does not determine ownership of the contents of any mail. If Mr. Pyle receives mail that is obviously intended for Mr. Joy personally, he is to forward it to Mr. Joy promptly. Additionally, this decision does not address any dispute between the parties except that regarding delivery of mail addressed to the Beagle newsletter. The Postal Service will comply with any directions of the court regarding delivery of the mail. See POM, Section 616.3.

The attached delivery order should be issued.

					William K. Mahn
					Administrative Judge