US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Although the contract for participation in profit involved in this case may not have created a partnership, as defined under § 157, Civil Code of Porto Rico, it gave the party entitled to participate an equitable interest in the property involved which attached specifically chanrobles.com-red

Page 233 U. S. 706

to the profits when they came into being. Barnes v. Alexander, 232 U. S. 117.

In such a case, if the party having the legal control of the property and profits abuses the fiduciary relation created by the contract, equitable relief is proper.

In this case, it does not appear that the contract under which one who had formerly occupied a government office in Porto Rico rendered services in connection with obtaining a franchise from the local and federal governments was improper or against public policy. Hazelton v. Sheckells, 202 U. S. 71, distinguished.

In this case, held that notwithstanding the forfeiture of an original grant and the final sale relating to a new but similar grant, as there was a continuous pursuit of the end achieved, one who was entitled to a share in the profits of the enterprise as originally conceived was entitled to share in the proceeds.

Where no error of magnitude is made by the court below in construing a contract for services executed in a foreign language and establishing the amount due thereunder, and only a translation of the contract is before this Court, the decree will not be reversed.

The facts, which involve the validity of a judgment on contract for services entered by the District Court of the United States for Porto Rico, are stated in the opinion. chanrobles.com-red

Page 233 U. S. 708