In a personal injury action, in what circumstances are limited partners considered indispensable parties to the litigation?

Normally, in a suit to dissolve and wind up the affairs of a partnership, all of the partners are considered indispensable parties to the litigation. (Rudnick v. Delfino (1956) 140 Cal.App.2d 260, 264, 294 P.2d 983.) The present case was not an action for dissolution of a partnership. However, the trial court's decree directly affected the affairs of the partnership and set the respective percentages of ownership of all the general and limited partners, including those limited partners who were not before the court. We do not believe, however, that the judgment should be reversed on the ground that these absent limited partners were 'indispensable' parties to this suit. The case has been fully tried, and until now, there has been no objection by appellant to the absence of parties. ¹⁰ Although

Page 754