Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Give Me Shelter: The Appropriateness of Inter-Partner Contribution Agreements

By Leslie D. Corwin
September 01, 2003

In the wake of the recent corporate scandals, such as Enron and WorldCom it is only a matter of time before the sanctity of Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs) is challenged. Jonathan D. Glater, 'Enron's Many Strands: Accounting; Suits Against Anderson May Test Partners' Risks,'  N.Y. Times, February 12, 2002, at C6. Providing lawyers in law firms registered as LLPs with additional liability shields from third parties will undoubtedly become a critical issue and, ultimately, it will be up to the courts to determine the scope and power of LLPs. Nevertheless, as a prophylactic device, it makes sense for law firms registered today as LLPs to consider whether it is appropriate for the partners to agree in the firm's partnership agreement to inter-partner contribution with respect to partner malpractice or other partner-generated liabilities.

To date, all U.S. jurisdictions have adopted some version of an LLP statute. Bromberg AR, Ribstein LE: Bromberg and Ribstein on Limited Liability Partnerships, The Revised Uniform Partnership Act, and The Uniform Limited Partnership Act (2001), NY, Little, Brown: '1.01(e); 2002. Many have adopted statutes similar to the Revised Uniform Partnership Act's model LLP statute, which provides limited liability for all partnership debts and obligations. Bromberg & Ribstein, '3.03. For example, California (Cal. Corp. Code ”16100 Corp. to 16962 Corp.), Connecticut (C.G.S.A. ”34-300 to 34-434), Delaware (Del. Code Ann., tit. 6 Del. C. '15-101 to 6 Del. C. '15-1210), New Jersey (N.J. Rev. Stat. NY, Little, Brown: '42:1A – 1-42:1A-56) and Texas (Vernon's Ann. Civ. St. art. 6132b-1.01 REV. CIV. STAT. To 6132b-11.04 Rev. Civ. STAT.) are among the states that have adopted versions of R.U.P.A. (For a complete listing of all the states that have adopted the R.U.P.A., see Bromberg & Ribstein, Ch.8.)

Such a statute would read that:

An obligation of a partnership incurred while the partnership is a limited liability partnership, whether arising in contract, tort, or otherwise, is solely the obligations of the partnership. A partner is not personally liable, directly or indirectly, including by way of contribution or otherwise, for such a partnership obligation solely by reason of being or so acting as a partner. R.U.P.A. '306(c).

While these statutes offer additional protection for individuals, the protection is not absolute. Some statutes do not protect LLP partners from certain type of claims, such as contract-based claims, and most maintain partner liability for participation in or supervision of negligent or wrongful conduct. (See, for example, Louisiana's partial-shield LLP statute at La. Rev. Stat. Ann. '9:3431. See also Delaware's statute, which reads in relevant part, that limited liability 'shall not affect the liability of a partner in a limited liability partnership for such partner's own negligence, wrongful acts, or misconduct, or that of any person under his direct supervision and control.' De. Code Ann. tit. 6 Del. C. '1515(c). See also the application of New York's LLP statute in Schuman v. Gallet, Dreyer & Berkey, L.L.P., 719 N.Y.S.2d 864 (1st Dep't 2001); N.Y.Jur.2d Bus. Rel. '2276; 67 Apr. N.Y.S.B.J. 38 (1995). This is in addition to the lawyer's ethical duty to monitor others in their firm.) Partners remain responsible for liabilities incurred and contracts entered into before the law firm registered as an LLP. Bromberg & Ribstein, '3.11(b). Therefore, despite the apparent barrier created by LLP statutes, creditors will probably always try to pursue LLP partners individually, either by characterizing their liability as direct rather than supervisory or by suing the partnership with contribution by individual partners. Bromberg & Ribstein, '3.08(b).

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.