<?xml version="1.0"?>
<law><site_title>Virginia Decoded</site_title><site_url>https://vacode.org</site_url><law_id>366851</law_id><section_number>50-73.62</section_number><catch_line>Right of action</catch_line><edition url="https://vacode.org/2026/" slug="2026" current="TRUE" last_updated="2026-08-02">2026</edition><structure><unit label="title" level="1" order_by="107" identifier="50">Partnerships</unit><unit label="chapter" level="2" order_by="1" identifier="2.1">Virginia Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act</unit><unit label="article" level="3" order_by="11" identifier="10">Derivative Actions</unit></structure><text>
						<section><p>A <span class="dictionary">limited partner</span> may bring an action in the right of a <span class="dictionary">limited partnership</span> to recover a <span class="dictionary">judgment</span> in its favor to the same extent that a stockholder may bring an action for a derivative suit under the Stock Corporation Act, Chapter 9 (&#xA7;&#xA0;<a class="law" title="Short title" href="/13.1-601/">13.1-601</a> et seq.) of Title 13.1. Such action may be brought if <span class="dictionary">general partners</span> with authority to do so have refused to bring the action or if an effort to cause those <span class="dictionary">general partners</span> to bring the action is not likely to succeed. The derivative action may not be maintained if it appears that the <span class="dictionary">plaintiff</span> does not fairly and adequately represent the interests of the <span class="dictionary">limited partners</span> and the partnership in enforcing the right of the partnership.</p></section></text><history>1985, c. 607.</history><metadata><court_decisions><item key="0"><name>Jennings v. KAY JENNINGS FAMILY LTD.</name><case_number>Record 070498.</case_number><citation>659 S.E.2d 283</citation><date>2008-04-18</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1058513/jennings-v-kay-jennings-family-ltd/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. 659 S.E.2d 283 (2008) .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html><abbr title="Supreme Court of Virginia">SCV</abbr></court_html></item><item key="1"><name> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. McCall v. Telerent Leasing Corp. (In Re BICC Ltd. .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </name><case_number>19-10050</case_number><citation>392 B.R. 209</citation><date>2008-03-21</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1897896/mccall-v-telerent-leasing-corp-in-re-bicc-ltd-partnership/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. 392 B.R. 209 (2008) .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html>United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia</court_html></item><item key="2"><name>Little v. Cooke</name><case_number>Record 062504.</case_number><citation>652 S.E.2d 129</citation><date>2007-11-02</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1058573/little-v-cooke/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. 652 S.E.2d 129 (2007) .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html><abbr title="Supreme Court of Virginia">SCV</abbr></court_html></item></court_decisions></metadata></law>
