Skip to main content

Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 323820.opn.pdf

Citation
Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 323820.opn.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,798 chars
I business. Accordingly, partners of a partnership are not covered for unemployment

I
insurance purposes. WAC 192-300-190; RCW 50.40.100. While the department argues

that a party claiming an exemption from taxation bears the burden of proof (see Br. of

I Resp't at 13), DeFelice Dentistry does not rely on an exemption but on its position that an

owner's services are not "employment" under the Employment Security Act.
j
A partnership is an association of two or more persons to carry on as co-owners a

business for profit; in Washington, at the time Drs. Armand, Loretta and Louise testify

they began to operate as partners, the formation of a partnership was governed by RCW

25.05.055. RCW 25.05.005(6). These are provisions of the RUPA, which was adopted

in Washington in 1998. LAWS OF 1998, ch. 103, § 1302.

Few reported Washington decisions apply the RUPA in determining whether

individuals have formed a partnership. Since RCW 25.05.904 provides that the RUPA

"shall be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law

with respect to the subject of the act among states enacting it" it is appropriate to look to

the official comments to the Uniform Partnership Act (1997), promulgated by the

National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, as aids in its

construction. Cf Townsend v. Quadrant Corp., 153 Wn. App. 870, 878 n.7, 224 P.3d

8
             

DeFelice v. Emp 't Sec. Dep't
No. 32382-0-III- dissent

818 (2009) (looking to comments to the uniform arbitration act as aids in construing the

Washington statute). RCW 25.05.904's command that the chapter be applied and

construed with a view to uniformity is also direct legislative authority for looking to case