Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 323. UNIFORM PARTNERSHIP ACT
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 323.30 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

[Repealed, 1997 c 174 art 12 s 68; 1998 c 262 s 12]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1945–2005 · leading case: Maus v. Galic, 669 N.W.2d 38 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Maus v. Galic, 669 N.W.2d 38 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 6× “As the litigation progressed, the record also reflects the parties’ understanding that the termination provision in their agreement allowed for either partner to terminate the partnership by leaving “for any reason.”
Straus v. Straus, 94 N.W.2d 679 (Minn. 1959). · cites it 5× “The provisions of § 323.30 govern as to whether a dissolution has occurred.”
Hogs Unlimited v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 401 N.W.2d 381 (Minn. 1987). · cites it 2× “Presumably the partnership has been dissolved, Minn.Stat. § 323.30 (1986), but not terminated.”
In Re L-Tryptophan Cases, 518 N.W.2d 616 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “RKMC argues that under the Uniform Partnership Act, Minn.Stat. § 323.30 (1990), the withdrawal of any partner constitutes a dissolution of the original partnership.”
H. F. Shepherdson Co. v. Cent. Fire Ins. Co., 19 N.W.2d 772 (Minn. 1945). “1941, § 323.30 (Mason St. 1927, § 7414), provides that a partnership is dissolved by the termination of the definite term or particular undertaking specified in the agreement.”
Bonner v. Showa Denko, K.K., 518 N.W.2d 616 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “RKMC argues that under the Uniform Partnership Act, Minn.Stat. § 323.30 (1990), the withdrawal of any partner constitutes a dissolution of the original partnership.”
Fleming v. Hagen Est., 702 N.W.2d 786 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “” Minn. Stat. § 323.30 (2) (2000). The 1994 UPA applicable here contains no such provision.”
— Minn. Stat. § 323.30(1) — 2 cases
Straus v. Straus, 94 N.W.2d 679 (Minn. 1959). “The provisions of § 323.30 govern as to whether a dissolution has occurred.”
Maus v. Galic, 669 N.W.2d 38 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). “As the litigation progressed, the record also reflects the parties’ understanding that the termination provision in their agreement allowed for either partner to terminate the partnership by leaving “for any reason.”
— Minn. Stat. § 323.30(2) — 1 case
Straus v. Straus, 94 N.W.2d 679 (Minn. 1959). “The provisions of § 323.30 govern as to whether a dissolution has occurred.”
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.