The superior court maydissolve a limited liability company in a proceeding by the following:
(1) The Attorney Generalif it is established that (i) the limited liability company obtained itsarticles of organization through fraud; or (ii) the limited liability companyhas, after written notice by the Attorney General given at least 120 days priorthereto, continued to exceed or abuse the authority conferred upon it by law;
(2) A member if it isestablished that (i) the managers, directors, or any other persons in controlof the limited liability company are deadlocked in the management of theaffairs of the limited liability company, the members are unable to break thedeadlock, and irreparable injury to the limited liability company is threatenedor being suffered, or the business and affairs of the limited liability companycan no longer be conducted to the advantage of the members generally, becauseof the deadlock; (ii) liquidation is reasonably necessary for the protection ofthe rights or interests of the complaining member, (iii) the assets of thelimited liability company are being misapplied or wasted; or (iv) the articlesof organization or a written operating agreement entitles the complainingmember to dissolution of the limited liability company; or
(3) The limitedliability company to have its voluntary dissolution continued under courtsupervision. (1993,c. 354, s. 1; 1995, c. 351, s. 11; 1999‑189, s. 5.2; 2000‑140, s.101(t); 2001‑387, s. 73.)
The superior court maydissolve a limited liability company in a proceeding by the following:
(1) The Attorney Generalif it is established that (i) the limited liability company obtained itsarticles of organization through fraud; or (ii) the limited liability companyhas, after written notice by the Attorney General given at least 120 days priorthereto, continued to exceed or abuse the authority conferred upon it by law;
(2) A member if it isestablished that (i) the managers, directors, or any other persons in controlof the limited liability company are deadlocked in the management of theaffairs of the limited liability company, the members are unable to break thedeadlock, and irreparable injury to the limited liability company is threatenedor being suffered, or the business and affairs of the limited liability companycan no longer be conducted to the advantage of the members generally, becauseof the deadlock; (ii) liquidation is reasonably necessary for the protection ofthe rights or interests of the complaining member, (iii) the assets of thelimited liability company are being misapplied or wasted; or (iv) the articlesof organization or a written operating agreement entitles the complainingmember to dissolution of the limited liability company; or
(3) The limitedliability company to have its voluntary dissolution continued under courtsupervision. (1993,c. 354, s. 1; 1995, c. 351, s. 11; 1999‑189, s. 5.2; 2000‑140, s.101(t); 2001‑387, s. 73.)
The superior court maydissolve a limited liability company in a proceeding by the following:
(1) The Attorney Generalif it is established that (i) the limited liability company obtained itsarticles of organization through fraud; or (ii) the limited liability companyhas, after written notice by the Attorney General given at least 120 days priorthereto, continued to exceed or abuse the authority conferred upon it by law;
(2) A member if it isestablished that (i) the managers, directors, or any other persons in controlof the limited liability company are deadlocked in the management of theaffairs of the limited liability company, the members are unable to break thedeadlock, and irreparable injury to the limited liability company is threatenedor being suffered, or the business and affairs of the limited liability companycan no longer be conducted to the advantage of the members generally, becauseof the deadlock; (ii) liquidation is reasonably necessary for the protection ofthe rights or interests of the complaining member, (iii) the assets of thelimited liability company are being misapplied or wasted; or (iv) the articlesof organization or a written operating agreement entitles the complainingmember to dissolution of the limited liability company; or
(3) The limitedliability company to have its voluntary dissolution continued under courtsupervision. (1993,c. 354, s. 1; 1995, c. 351, s. 11; 1999‑189, s. 5.2; 2000‑140, s.101(t); 2001‑387, s. 73.)
