Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

RCW 25.05.300

Events causing dissolution and winding up of partnership business.

Applied in 6 court decisions — leading case McCormick v. Dunn & Black, PS (2007)

Most recently applied in Bryan W. McLelland, DDS, et ux v. Mark C. Paxton, DDS, et ux (November 2019)

1998 c 103 s 801.

How often courts cite this section

20072010201920
citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

A partnership is dissolved, and its business must be wound up, only upon the occurrence of any of the following events:

(1) In a partnership at will, the partnership's having notice from a partner, other than a partner who is dissociated under RCW 25.05.225 (2) through (10), of that partner's express will to withdraw as a partner, or on a later date specified by the partner;

(2) In a partnership for a definite term or particular undertaking:

(a) Within ninety days after a partner's dissociation by death or otherwise under RCW 25.05.225 (6) through (10) or wrongful dissociation under RCW 25.05.230(2) if a majority of the remaining partners decide to wind up the partnership business, and for purposes of this subsection a partner's rightful dissociation pursuant to RCW 25.05.230(2)(b)(i) constitutes the expression of that partner's will to wind up the partnership business;

(b) The express will of all of the partners to wind up the partnership business; or

(c) The expiration of the term or the completion of the undertaking;

(3) An event agreed to in the partnership agreement resulting in the winding up of the partnership business;

(4) An event that makes it unlawful for all or substantially all of the business of the partnership to be continued, but a cure of illegality within ninety days after notice to the partnership of the event is effective retroactively to the date of the event for purposes of this section;

(5) On application by a partner, a judicial determination that:

(a) The economic purpose of the partnership is likely to be unreasonably frustrated;

(b) Another partner has engaged in conduct relating to the partnership business which makes it not reasonably practicable to carry on the business in partnership with that partner; or

(c) It is not otherwise reasonably practicable to carry on the partnership business in conformity with the partnership agreement; or

(6) On application by a transferee of a partner's transferable interest, a judicial determination that it is equitable to wind up the partnership business:

(a) After the expiration of the term or completion of the undertaking, if the partnership was for a definite term or particular undertaking at the time of the transfer or entry of the charging order that gave rise to the transfer; or

(b) At any time, if the partnership was a partnership at will at the time of the transfer or entry of the charging order that gave rise to the transfer.

Official source: Washington State Legislature. Reproduced from public-domain Washington statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.