Liquidating trustee statute of limitations
Relatedly, the last sentence of subdivision (b) of § 121-607 states: “Subject to subdivision (c) of this section, this subdivision shall not affect any obligation or liability of a limited partner under a partnership agreement or other applicable law for the amount of a distribution.” Thus, while subdivision (b) makes a limited partner liable for a violation of subdivision (a) only to the extent that the limited partner knew that the distribution rendered the partnership insolvent, it expressly states that this does not affect “liability of a limited partner under a partnership agreement or other applicable law for the amount of a distribution,” but such liability is “[s]ubject to subdivision (c).” It is hard to imagine how this sentence can mean anything other than that a limited partner's liability for distributions “under a partnership agreement or other applicable law” is subject to the three-year statute of limitations.It is additionally noteworthy that subdivision (b) of Partnership Law § 121-607 refers to violations of “subdivision a” no less than four times, when limiting liability to a limited partner for such violation to circumstances when the partner knew that the distribution rendered the partnership insolvent. Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff LLP, New York (Jonathan Gardner of counsel), for respondent. Robert Schrager of counsel), for Edith Ann Barish, appellant.Subject to subdivision (c) of this section, this subdivision shall not affect any obligation or liability of a limited partner under a partnership agreement or other applicable law for the amount of a distribution.“(c) Unless otherwise agreed, a limited partner who receives a wrongful distribution from a limited partnership shall have no liability under this article or other applicable law for the amount of the distribution after the expiration of three years from the date of the distribution.”In finding the limitation period in subdivision (c) applicable only to distributions that left the partnership insolvent, the motion court explained: “The statute does not define ‘wrongful distribution.’ However, as it is not defined, and, as it follows subdivision (a) and (b), subdivision (c) must refer to the distribution that (a) and (b) describe, i.e. The court also interpreted the last sentence of subdivision (b), stating:“Thus, § 508(b) contains a savings clause, making it clear that §§ 508(a) and (b) do not override liability under the operating agreement or other ‘applicable law’-but it provides that the savings clause is expressly subject to the three-year limitations period in § 508(c).
If more than one person creates or contributes property to a trust, each person is a settlor of the portion of the trust property attributable to that person’s contribution except to the extent another person has the power to revoke or withdraw that portion.“State” means any state of the United States and includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory or possession subject to the legislative authority of the United States.“Terms of a trust” means the manifestation of the settlor’s intent regarding a trust’s provisions as expressed in the trust instrument or as may be established by other evidence that would be admissible in a judicial proceeding.Reasonable diligence does not require an employee of the organization to communicate information unless the communication is part of the individual’s regular duties or the individual knows a matter involving the trust would be materially affected by the information. 736.0108(1) for the designation of a principal place of administration of the trust and the requirements under s.736.0107 for the designation of a jurisdiction the law of which determines the meaning and effect of the terms of a trust. 736.0813(1)(a) and (b) to notify qualified beneficiaries of an irrevocable trust of the existence of the trust, of the identity of the trustee, and of their rights to trust accountings. 736.0813(1)(e) to respond to the request of a qualified beneficiary of an irrevocable trust for relevant information about the assets and liabilities of the trust and the particulars relating to trust administration.There is no allegation that any of the defendants had any reason to know that their distribution was based on an inflated value of the partnership.Accordingly, since the three-year statute of limitations contained in Partnership Law § 121-607(c) is applicable to the instant claims and it is uncontested that none of the claims falls within the three-year period of limitations, defendants' motions to dismiss the complaints on that ground should have been granted.