LD 1609
pg. 51
Page 50 of 148 An Act To Establish the Uniform Partnership Act Page 52 of 148
Download Bill Text
LR 1469
Item 1

 
At common law, a partnership, not being a legal entity, could
not sue or be sued in the firm name. The UPA itself is silent on
this point, so in the absence of another enabling statute, it is
generally necessary to join all the partners in an action against
the partnership.

 
Most States have statutes or rules authorizing partnerships to
sue or be sued in the partnership name. Many of those statutes,
however, are found in the state provisions dealing with civil
procedure rather than in the partnership act.

 
2. Subsection (b) provides that suit generally may be brought
against the partnership and any or all of the partners in the
same action or in separate actions. It is intended to clarify
that the partners need not be named in an action against the
partnership. In particular, in an action against a partnership,
it is not necessary to name a partner individually in addition to
the partnership. This will simplify and reduce the cost of
litigation, especially in cases of small claims where there are
known to be significant partnership assets and thus no necessity
to collect the judgment out of the partners' assets.

 
Where the partnership is a limited liability partnership, the
limited liability partnership rules clarify that a partner not
liable for the alleged partnership obligation may not be named in
the action against the partnership unless the action also seeks
to establish personal liability of the partner for the
obligation. See subsections (b) and (d).

 
3. Subsection (c) provides that a judgment against the
partnership is not, standing alone, a judgment against the
partners, and it cannot be satisfied from a partner's personal
assets unless there is a judgment against the partner. Thus, a
partner must be individually named and served, either in the
action against the partnership or in a later suit, before his
personal assets may be subject to levy for a claim against the
partnership.

 
RUPA leaves it to the law of judgments, as did the UPA, to
determine the collateral effects to be accorded a prior judgment
for or against the partnership in a subsequent action against a
partner individually. See Section 60 of the Second Restatement
of Judgments (1982) and the Comments thereto.

 
4. Subsection (d) requires partnership creditors to exhaust
the partnership's assets before levying on a judgment debtor
partner's individual property where the partner is personally
liable for the partnership obligation under Section 306. That
rule respects the concept of the partnership as an entity and
makes partners more in the nature of guarantors than principal


Page 50 of 148 Top of Page Page 52 of 148