Ky. Rev. Stat. § 275.335

Persons who may sue in company's name -- Recording of votes --

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Prosecution and settlement of suits. (1) Unless otherwise provided in a written operating agreement, a suit on behalf of the limited liability company may be brought in the name of the company only by: (a) One (1) or more members of the company, who are authorized to sue by the vote of more than one half (1/2) of the number of members eligible to vote thereon; or (b) One (1) or more managers of the limited liability company, if the articles of organization vest management of the company in one (1) or more managers, who are authorized to do so by the vote of more than one-half (1/2) of the number of managers eligible to vote. (2) Subsection (1)(a) of this section shall be applicable irrespective of whether the articles of organization vest management of the limited liability company in one (1) or more managers. (3) Unless otherwise provided in a written operating agreement, in any vote of the members or managers pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the vote of any member or manager who has an interest in the outcome of the suit that is adverse to the interest of the limited liability company shall be excluded. (4) Unless otherwise provided in a written operating agreement, any vote pursuant to subsection (1) of this section shall be set forth in a record signed or otherwise approved by each member or manager voting in favor of bringing suit on behalf of the limited liability company. (5) Except as otherwise provided in a writing approved in accordance with subsection (1) of this section that would also be sufficient to amend the operating agreement pursuant to the terms of the written operating agreement or, in the absence of a provision governing amendment of the operating agreement, the prosecution and settlement of any suit brought pursuant to subsection (1) of this section shall be pursuant to KRS 275.175. (6) Every member and manager of a limited liability company shall be deemed to have consented to the jurisdiction of the courts of the Commonwealth of Kentucky for any action by, in the name of, or on behalf of the limited liability company or for any violation of a duty owed the limited liability company or a member thereof. Effective: June 24, 2015 History: Amended 2015 Ky. Acts ch. 34, sec. 54, effective June 24, 2015. -- Amended 2012 Ky. Acts ch. 81, sec. 112, effective July 12, 2012. -- Created 1994 Ky. Acts ch. 389, sec. 67, effective July 15, 1994.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2019–2025 · leading case: Saunders v. Briner
Saunders v. Briner (2019) conn “See Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 275.330 (LexisNexis 2012) (authorizing suit by or against limited liability company in its own name); Ky.”
Loretta Mounce, in Her Capacity as Administratrix of the Estate of Jamie Scott Mounce, and on Behalf of the Texas Cattle (2025) kyctapp · cites it 3× “She contends that this claim has nothing to do with KRS 275.335 or KRS 275.337.1 Instead, Loretta maintains that any injury sustained by the Estate as a result of Brad’s alleged misuse of the insurance proceeds stems entirely from a purported injury to the LLC.”
Brightmore Home Care of Kentucky, LLC v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services (2021) kyctapp “Finally, PCM argues the Cabinet has jurisdiction over the witnesses because of their ownership of Brightmore, relying on KRS 275.335(6) and International Union of Operating Eng’rs v.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 275.335(1) — 1 case
Loretta Mounce, in Her Capacity as Administratrix of the Estate of Jamie Scott Mounce, and on Behalf of the Texas Cattle (2025) kyctapp “She contends that this claim has nothing to do with KRS 275.335 or KRS 275.337.1 Instead, Loretta maintains that any injury sustained by the Estate as a result of Brad’s alleged misuse of the insurance proceeds stems entirely from a purported injury to the LLC.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 275.335(6) — 1 case
Brightmore Home Care of Kentucky, LLC v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services (2021) kyctapp “Finally, PCM argues the Cabinet has jurisdiction over the witnesses because of their ownership of Brightmore, relying on KRS 275.335(6) and International Union of Operating Eng’rs v.”
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.