[CCWG-ACCT] member organization and single membership structure

[Omadhina Internet Services]

I don't see limited liability in that statute - quite the reverse in fact.

Greg: can you please take me to authority regarding the limited 
liability provisions to which you referred??



On 09/07/15 15:40, Dr Eberhard Lisse wrote:
> Dear Co-Chairs,
>
> I most certainly don't see the UA happen, in particular as far as ccTLDs
> are concerned, but Auntie Google reveals:
>
> http://law.justia.com/codes/california/2011/corp/title-3/18250-18270/18270/
>
> reads
>
> 	2011 California Code Corporations Code TITLE 3.
> 	UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS [18000 - 24001.5] CHAPTER 5.
> 	Liability and Enforcement of Judgments Section 18270
>
> 	[...]
>
> 	(a) A judgment creditor of a member, director, officer, or
> 	agent of an unincorporated association may not levy
> 	execution against the assets of the member, director,
> 	officer, or agent to satisfy a judgment based on a claim
> 	against the unincorporated association unless a judgment
> 	based on the same claim has been obtained against the
> 	unincorporated association and any of the following
> 	conditions is satisfied:
>
> 		(1) A writ of execution on the judgment against the
> 		unincorporated association has been returned
> 		unsatisfied in whole or in part.
>
> 		(2) The unincorporated association is a debtor in
> 		bankruptcy.
>
> 		(3) The member, director, officer, or agent has
> 		agreed that the creditor need not exhaust the assets
> 		of the unincorporated association.
>
> 		(4) A court grants permission to the judgment
> 		creditor to levy execution against the assets of a
> 		member, director, officer, or agent based on a
> 		finding that the assets of the unincorporated
> 		association subject to execution are clearly
> 		insufficient to satisfy the judgment, that
> 		exhaustion of the assets of the unincorporated
> 		association is excessively burdensome, or that the
> 		grant of permission is an appropriate exercise of
> 		the court s equitable powers.
>
> 	[...]
>
> As the UAs will not have any or much assets, (a)(1) and/or (a)(4) are
> not very high hurdles...
>
>
> el
>
>
> On 2015-07-09 15:07, Greg Shatan wrote:
>> Nigel,
>>
>> A California unincorporated association is a limited liability
>> vehicle, as it is in certain other jurisdictions.  If we were to
>> go down the route of have SO/ACs be/create/empower (three
>> different options) a legal entity, one would expect a choice to be
>> made that would shield SO/ACs and their members from unlimited
>> legal liability (and there are a variety of options to do so).
>> While this should be implicit by now in this discussion, since it
>> has been explicitly discussed in the past, I'm glad for the
>> opportunity to make it explicit once again.  Suggesting someone
>> cross the street is not equivalent to telling them to walk into
>> traffic.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net
>> <mailto:nigel at channelisles.net>> wrote:
>>
>>      Greg, all
>>
>>      I have a deadly serious question.
>>
>>      Why would any Member of an SO voluntarily submit to the danger of
>>      unlimited monetary liability?
>>
>>      So why is anyone even considering UA status for more than 10 seconds?
>>
>>
>>      Nigel
>>
>>      See
>>      http://www.scvo.org.uk/setting-up-a-charity/decide-on-a-structure/voluntary-or-unincorporated-association/
> [...]
>

-- 
The Directors, Omadhina Internet Services Ltd.
Registered in Alderney, C.I.  Reg'd No. 1770
Office: 4&5 St Anne's Walk, Alderney GY9 3JZ
Tel. 01481 520618  Email: directors at omadhina.net