Wash. Rev. Code » Title 25 · Chapter 25.05
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 25.05.235 (2026)

Effect of partner's dissociation

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) If a partner's dissociation results in a dissolution and winding up of the partnership business, article 8 of this chapter applies; otherwise, article 7 of this chapter applies.
(2) Upon a partner's dissociation:
(a) The partner's right to participate in the management and conduct of the partnership business terminates, except as otherwise provided in RCW 25.05.310;
(b) The partner's duty of loyalty under RCW 25.05.165(2)(c) terminates; and
(c) The partner's duty of loyalty under RCW 25.05.165(2) (a) and (b) and duty of care under RCW 25.05.165(3) continue only with regard to matters arising and events occurring before the partner's dissociation, unless the partner participates in winding up the partnership's business pursuant to RCW 25.05.310.
[ 1998 c 103 s 603.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2005–2022 · leading case: Horne v. Aune, 121 P.3d 1227 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Horne v. Aune, 121 P.3d 1227 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “RCW 25.05.235. But when partners choose the path of dissolution and winding up, the procedures are substantially the same under RUPA as they were under UPA.”
Horne v. Aune, 130 Wash. App. 183 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “RCW 25.05.235. But when partners choose the path of dissolution and winding up, the procedures are substantially the same under RUPA as they were under UPA.”
Johanna Grider v. Christopher Quinn (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “RCW 25.05.235(2)(a). A partner may expel another partner because of a transfer of most of his interest or because of 30 No.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 25.05.235(2)(a) — 1 case
Johanna Grider v. Christopher Quinn (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “RCW 25.05.235(2)(a). A partner may expel another partner because of a transfer of most of his interest or because of 30 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.