Arthur Young & Co. merged with Ernst & Whinney to form the accounting firm of Ernst & Young. In order to save
the underfunded retirement plan, the firm decided to fire many older employees. Simpson sued claiming age
discrimination. The firm claimed that Simpson was a partner and thus not covered by the age discrimination statute.
Court determined that, regardless of what Simpson was called, he was an employee rather than an employee. This was
because he received none of the firm’s profits and mainly because he had no role in choosing the Management
Committee who actually made decisions. UPA (1994) § 103(a) says that UPA rules partnership except as noted in
partnership agreement – HOWEVER, there are certain limits to the partnership agreement in § 103(b) such as that the
agreement may not “unreasonably restrict the right of access to books and records under Section 403(b).”
We have located some similar legal questions and legal question categories. Check out these challenging questions that askquestions about Civil Procedure Cases, Independent Contractor and are similar to What happened in Simpson v. Ernest & Young?. Also, we have included a list of some of our more popular legal question categories. These categories are based on what everyone is asking and answering.