O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 14-9-1001 (2019)

Right of limited partner to bring action

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A limited partner may maintain an action in the right of a limited partnership to recover a judgment in its favor if general partners with authority to do so have refused to bring the action or an effort to cause those general partners to bring the action is not likely to succeed. The foregoing authority to bring an action in the right of a limited partnership shall not limit any right a limited partner might have under the partnership agreement or otherwise.

History

(Code 1981, § 14-9-1001, enacted by Ga. L. 1988, p. 1016, § 1.)

Annotations

COMMENT Note to Georgia Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act This section permits limited partner derivative suits in specified circumstances. Prior Georgia Law There is no provision under prior Georgia law for partnership derivative actions. Comparison With Official RULPA Language has been added to the official version to clarify that, by granting a right to sue derivatively, the Section should not be read to limit any other rights, including the right to bring an action for accounting, to sue directly outside an accounting, or to pursue remedies provided for in the partnership agreement. Cross-References Action for accounting: §§ 14-8-22 and 14-8-43. Who may bring a derivative action: § 14-9-1002. Pleading effort to secure action by general partner: § 14-9-1003. RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 59A Am. Jur. 2d, Partnership, § 873 et seq.

C.J.S. - 68 C.J.S., Partnership, § 605 et seq.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2007–2007 · leading case: Hendry v. Wells, 650 S.E.2d 338 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007).
Hendry v. Wells, 650 S.E.2d 338 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 14-9-1001. 7 See Prodigy Centers/Atlanta No.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.