News & Commentary

An operating agreement is the governing document of every LLC. When it fails to address the conflicts that commonly arise between partners, California’s default rules take over, and those defaults rarely match what any partner originally intended.

At Rogers, Sheffield & Campbell, our business attorneys have seen the full lifecycle of these disputes: from the optimistic formation meeting where no one anticipates a falling out, to the costly litigation that a better-drafted agreement would have prevented entirely.

An operating agreement is only as valuable as what it actually says. When it leaves key provisions silent, ambiguous, or contradictory, it becomes the source of the dispute rather than its resolution.

What an Operating Agreement Is Supposed to Do

A well-drafted operating agreement defines the entire legal relationship between LLC members. It allocates decision-making authority, governs how profits and losses are shared, sets the rules for bringing in or removing partners, establishes what happens when a member wants to leave, and provides a mechanism for resolving impasses.

When it does these things clearly, partners have a shared set of rules to return to when disagreement arises. When it does them vaguely or not at all, every ambiguity becomes a potential argument, and every gap becomes a potential lawsuit.

When the Agreement Is Silent, California Decides

Under California Corporations Code § 17701.10, an LLC’s operating agreement governs the relations among its members. The statute provides that to the extent the operating agreement does not address a matter, the Revised Uniform Limited Liability Company Act governs it instead.

What that means in practice is that when partners have not addressed an issue in their agreement, California’s RULLCA fills the gap with default rules. Those defaults are designed to be functional, not to reflect what any particular group of partners intended. They are a safety net, not a substitute for thoughtful drafting.

Partners who discover after the fact that California law governs their dispute rather than their own agreement are frequently surprised by the result.

Voting Rights and Management Authority

One of the most common sources of partner disputes is ambiguity over who has authority to make decisions and what level of agreement is required for action. This is especially common in multi-member LLCs where management responsibilities are divided.

Under California Corporations Code § 17704.07, member-managed and manager-managed LLCs operate under different default rules regarding who can act on the LLC’s behalf and which decisions require member approval.

If the operating agreement does not clearly specify the management structure, or if it describes a structure but does not address specific types of decisions, the defaults apply, and partners may disagree sharply about what those defaults require.

Common conflicts include:

• Whether a managing partner can enter into contracts above a certain dollar threshold without consent
• Whether a minority member has veto rights over major decisions
• Whether changes to compensation or profit allocation require unanimous or majority consent
• Who has the authority to open bank accounts, hire employees, or sell company assets

These are decisions that will come up in almost every business relationship. Leaving them to implication or informal understanding is a setup for conflict.

Buy-Sell Provisions: The Most Commonly Overlooked Clause

If voting rights are the most commonly misunderstood part of an operating agreement, buy-sell provisions are the most commonly omitted. A buy-sell clause establishes what happens when a partner wants to leave the LLC, is forced out, becomes incapacitated, or dies.

Without a buy-sell provision, partners who want out face a legally complex situation. Their transferable interest in the LLC does not automatically give them the right to be bought out at a fair price on a reasonable timeline. They may be entitled to their share of distributions but unable to compel a buyout.

Their heirs, in the event of death, may find themselves involuntary partners with people they have never met.

Well-drafted buy-sell provisions specify a valuation mechanism, a timeline, and a payment structure. Poorly drafted or absent provisions lead to disputes over all three, frequently resulting in business valuations done in the context of litigation rather than by agreement.

Profit Distributions and Capital Contribution Disputes

Operating agreements that do not clearly address when and how profits will be distributed create significant conflict, particularly when partners have different financial needs or different views about how aggressively the business should reinvest.

A partner who expects quarterly distributions may find themselves in dispute with a managing partner who prefers to retain earnings for growth. Without a provision addressing distribution policy, the dispute is resolved through negotiation, and if negotiation fails, through litigation.

Capital contribution disputes arise when the agreement does not clearly define each partner’s initial or ongoing obligations to fund the LLC. If one partner contributes more than expected and another falls short, and the agreement does not address remedies, the result is a combination of a financial dispute and an authority dispute.

Deadlock: When Partners Cannot Agree and Cannot Get Out

Deadlock occurs when equal or otherwise balanced partners reach an impasse that they cannot resolve. Without a deadlock provision, a 50/50 LLC can become paralyzed. Neither partner can compel the other to act, but neither can unilaterally exit or force a dissolution on favorable terms.

California courts have the authority to dissolve an LLC under certain circumstances, but judicial dissolution is a last resort and an expensive one. A well-drafted operating agreement addresses deadlock directly, providing mechanisms such as mandatory mediation, a designated tiebreaker, or a buy-sell trigger that activates when partners cannot agree on major decisions.

Transfer Restrictions and Admitting New Partners

An operating agreement that does not address transfer restrictions creates an opening for a partner to sell or transfer their interest to a third party without the consent of the remaining members.

Transfer restrictions protect each partner’s right to know and approve their co-owners. They typically require member approval before any interest transfers to a new party. When they are absent or ambiguous, a partner may attempt a transfer, and the remaining members may find themselves litigating whether the transfer was valid.

How These Disputes Reach Litigation

The path from a poorly drafted operating agreement to active litigation is often gradual. A disagreement about management authority becomes a pattern of disputed decisions. A dispute over distributions becomes a claim of breach of fiduciary duty. A transfer restriction conflict becomes a lawsuit over the validity of an ownership transfer.

Once disputes reach this stage, the operating agreement becomes an exhibit in litigation rather than a tool for resolution. Rogers, Sheffield & Campbell’s business law attorneys handle these matters regularly. What we find, consistently, is that earlier drafting investment would have resolved most of the underlying disputes before they became lawsuits.

How Rogers, Sheffield & Campbell Approaches Operating Agreements and Partner Disputes

Founded in 1973, Rogers, Sheffield & Campbell, LLP is one of the oldest law firms on California’s Central Coast. Our business law attorneys work with clients at formation to ensure that operating agreements address the provisions most likely to generate conflict, in language that leaves as little room for interpretation as possible.

When disputes arise despite those efforts, or when clients come to us with agreements drafted elsewhere, we evaluate the agreement against California’s default rules, identify the gaps, and advise on whether the matter can be resolved through negotiation, mediation, or whether litigation is unavoidable.

Our attorneys carry Martindale-Hubbell’s AV Preeminent rating, signifying the highest peer-rated standards of legal ability and ethics. Clients work directly with our senior attorneys. No matter what is handed to junior associates.

If your LLC’s operating agreement has not been reviewed since formation, or if a partner dispute is emerging, contact Rogers, Sheffield & Campbell for a consultation before positions harden.

- The Business Law Team
  Rogers Sheffield & Campbell, LLP

This article is not intended to provide legal advice. For legal advice on any of the information in this post, please use the form to the right or contact us by phone at 805-963-9721.