Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Racing Investment Fund 2000, LLC v. Clay Ward Agency, Inc. Case Brief

Kentucky Supreme Court2010Docket #2137041
320 S.W.3d 654 2010 WL 3374166 Corporations Contracts

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A creditor tried to force an LLC’s members to pay a company debt by having a court order a “capital call” under the LLC’s operating agreement. The court refused, holding that such a provision does not waive the members’ fundamental protection from personal liability for company debts.

Legal Significance: This case strongly affirms the limited liability shield for LLC members. It establishes that a standard capital call provision is not an “unequivocal” agreement to assume personal liability for the LLC’s debts, protecting members from being forced to pay creditors directly through this mechanism.

Racing Investment Fund 2000, LLC v. Clay Ward Agency, Inc. Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Racing Investment Fund 2000, LLC, a limited liability company, owed its insurer, Clay Ward Agency, Inc., for unpaid premiums. Clay Ward obtained an agreed judgment against the LLC for approximately $70,000. The LLC paid a portion of the judgment using all of its remaining assets, leaving a balance of over $57,000. The LLC then ceased operations. Clay Ward sought to collect the remaining debt by compelling the LLC to utilize a provision in its Operating Agreement. Section 4.3(a) of the agreement authorized the LLC’s Manager to require members to make additional capital contributions “to pay operating, administrative, or other business expenses.” Clay Ward argued this provision created an asset—the right to demand funds from members—that the LLC must use to satisfy the judgment. The trial court agreed, holding the LLC in contempt and ordering it to make a capital call on its members. The Court of Appeals affirmed, leading to this appeal before the Kentucky Supreme Court. The central dispute was whether this internal capital funding mechanism could be invoked by a court for the benefit of an external creditor.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a provision in a limited liability company’s operating agreement, which permits the manager to make capital calls on members for business expenses, constitute a waiver of the members’ statutory immunity from personal liability for the company’s debts, thereby allowing a court to compel such a call to satisfy a judgment creditor?

No. The Court held that a standard capital call provision in an Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a provision in a limited liability company’s operating agreement, which permits the manager to make capital calls on members for business expenses, constitute a waiver of the members’ statutory immunity from personal liability for the company’s debts, thereby allowing a court to compel such a call to satisfy a judgment creditor?

Conclusion

This case provides a strong precedent protecting the integrity of the LLC Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo co

Legal Rule

Under Kentucky's Limited Liability Company Act, members are not personally liable for Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Legal Analysis

The Kentucky Supreme Court reversed the lower courts, grounding its decision in Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A court cannot order an LLC to make a capital call
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?