Wisconsin Supreme Court Clears the Path to the Courtroom for Member-Driven LLC Litigation

08 April 2019 Wisconsin Appellate Law Blog
Authors: Stephan J. Nickels Megan R. Stelljes

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court issued an important decision last week in Marx v. Morris, 2019 WI 34, holding that “[c]orporate principles of derivative standing do not apply to the distinct business form of an LLC.” Id. ¶ 4.

In a 4-3 decision written by Chief Justice Patience Roggensack, the court explained that the statutory scheme applicable to LLCs does not distinguish between direct and derivate claims and that the court would not “judicially import” one from the corporation statutes. Id. ¶¶ 40-41. The pass-through nature of LLCs also played a role in the decision; the court observed that there is “a much closer financial connection between harm to an LLC and harm to its members than between harm to a corporation and harm to its shareholders.” Id. ¶ 45.

Marx appears to allow LLC members to start litigation in their own name, free from strictures of the derivate procedures for corporations. And, without an equivalent of the special-litigation-committee process for corporations, see Wis. Stat. § 180.0744, LLCs might be left without a mechanism to stop the suit short of full litigation, regardless of where the best interests of the LLC lie. According to a dissent written by Justice Daniel Kelly and joined by Justices Shirley Abrahamson and Rebecca Bradley, the decision “eliminate[s] the LLC’s ability to control litigation,” and “a cause of action [now] belongs to the first person to grab it.” 2019 WI 34, ¶ 87.

Marx also calls into question the continued relevance, at least for inter-company disputes among LLC members, of Wis. Stat. §183.1101, which provides that members can bring actions on behalf of the company only after first receiving an affirmative vote by the members holding at least 50% of the membership interests. After Marx, there would seem to be no need to name the company as a party in the first instance, and, instead, individual members might be left to fight it out, with potentially no one representing the best interests of the company.

Marx could lead to an uptick in litigation by LLC members who wish to challenge company decisions in the courtroom. As a precaution against this, LLC members who want to control litigation by members might consider amending their LLC’s operating agreements to “opt in” to corporate derivative procedures.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services