(a) On application by or for a partner the court shall decree a dissolution whenever:
(1) A partner has been adjudicated incompetent or is shown to be of unsound mind,
(2) A partner becomes in any other way incapable of performing his part of the partnership contract,
(3) A partner has been guilty of such conduct as tends to affect prejudicially the carrying on of the business,
(4) A partner wilfully or persistently commits a breach of the partnership agreement, or otherwise so conducts himself in matters relating to the partnership business that it is not reasonably practicable to carry on the business in partnership with him,
(5) The business of the partnership can only be carried on at a loss,
(6) Other circumstances render a dissolution equitable.
(b) On the application of the purchaser of a partner's interest under G.S. 59-57 and 59-58:
(1) After the termination of the specified term or particular undertaking,
(2) At any time if the partnership was a partnership at will when the interest was assigned or when the charging order was issued.
(c) The name of a registered limited liability partnership becomes available for use by another entity as provided in G.S. 55D-21. (1941, c. 374, s. 32; 1985, c. 589, s. 29; 2001-358, s. 41; 2001-387, ss. 173, 175(a); 2001-413, s. 6; 2001-487, s. 107(b).)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1957–2022 · leading case:
Crosby v. Bowers, 361 S.E.2d 97 (N.C. Ct. App. 1987).
Crosby v. Bowers, 361 S.E.2d 97 (N.C. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 3× “Thus, in this situation (unless the trial court dissolves the partnership under G.S. 59-62) plaintiff would also be allowed to purchase defendants’ interests and enforce the non-competition clause.”
Ludwig v. Walter, 331 S.E.2d 177 (N.C. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 2× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 59-62 (1982). Dissolution will not affect the liability of the partners, N.”
Bright v. Williams, 97 S.E.2d 247 (N.C. 1957).
“Leath to defendants, a settlement and accounting of the partnership affairs, and distribution of the partnership properties to the partners in accord with their respective rights after the discharge of partnership obligations.”
Ehp Land Co., Inc. v. Bosher, 2010 NCBC 16 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 2× “Rather, it contends it is proceeding under G.S. 59-59, which provides that a partnership is dissolved by any "partner ceasing to be associated in the carrying on .”
Norment v. Rabon, 2022 NCBC 32 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2022).
“24; § 57D-6-02; § 57D-6-04; § 59-62; § 59-67 (2021). 58. For these reasons, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment based on lack of standing is GRANTED as to Norment’s claims for breach of fiduciary duty and constructive fraud regarding Cavalier and Advantage.”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 59-62(a)(3) — 1 case
Crosby v. Bowers, 361 S.E.2d 97 (N.C. Ct. App. 1987).
“Thus, in this situation (unless the trial court dissolves the partnership under G.S. 59-62) plaintiff would also be allowed to purchase defendants’ interests and enforce the non-competition clause.”
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.