Limited partnerships and limited liability companies are often
used for closely-held businesses or investment activities.
These entities have also become popular estate planning vehicles.
Interests in such entities are often significantly discounted
for Federal Gift and Estate Tax purposes. Many families are
attracted to the creditor protection provided to the limited
partnership or LLC interests held by their family members.
If a
creditor obtains a judgment against a partner or member, most
state statutes provide that the creditor can obtain a "charging
order" against the debtor's partnership or limited liability
company interest. This allows the creditor to receive the
distributions to which the partner or member would be entitled.
On its
face, these statutes do not expressly allow for any other
creditor remedies. This is consistent with the concept that
the other partners of a partnership or members of a limited
liability company should not have their business or investment
activity disrupted, nor should they be forced to take in a
substitute partner or member (e.g., the judgment creditor).
This was the generally understood position taken by the Uniform
Limited Partnership Act and many limited liability acts.
However,
a Connecticut court has held that a judgment creditor of a
limited partnership could foreclose on the partnership interest.
[Madison Hills Ltd. v. Madison Hills, Inc., 644 A.2d
363 (Conn. App. 1994).] This holding was in conflict with
a prior Florida court decision which held that foreclosure
was not an available remedy for a judgment creditor of a limited
partner. The Connecticut court's holding opened the door for
courts to provide a variety of remedies to creditors of partners
in limited partnerships and members in LLC's. These additional
remedies could result in forced dissolutions of the entities
and the sale of their assets. The Alaska Legislature concluded
that such results could be very harmful to the other partners
or members, their families and their business interests.
The proposed
amendments make it clear that a judgment creditor of an Alaska
limited partnership or limited liability company has only
the remedy of a charging order. Thus, the creditor will receive
all distributions made to the debtor partner or member. However,
the right to receive such distributions is the judgment creditor's
sole remedy. No other remedies are available to the judgment
creditor or to a court implementing a creditor's collection
request.
The strengthened
creditor protection provided to these entities should make
them even more popular for estate planning purposes. While
many families are attracted to these entities for Federal
Gift and Estate Tax reduction, creditor protection may prove
to be an equally advantageous reason for their use.
The Alaska
Revised Limited Partnership Act is amended by changes to AS
32.11.170 and .340. The Alaska Revised Limited Liability Act
is amended by changes to AS 10.50.380. These amendments will
be effective immediately, and will apply to remedies pursued
after the effective date.
Alaska
House Bill 222 passed on February 22, 2000. Its effective
date is March 8, 2000.

|