- 7 - person, Frederic Rector conversed with the attorneys by telephone, and decedent corresponded with the attorneys. The attorneys believed that they represented decedent in this process, but neither of decedent’s sons had separate counsel as to the formation of RLP or as to the structuring and drafting of the RLP agreement. 6. Formation of RLP and Gifts of Partnership Interests The RLP agreement was executed on December 17, 1998.4 Under the terms of the agreement, decedent was a 2-percent general partner in RLP and the 1991 revocable trust was a 98-percent limited partner in RLP. John Rector was listed in the RLP agreement as a 0-percent general partner, but he was not in fact a general partner.5 The RLP agreement stated that RLP was formed to own and manage the Property contributed by the Partners and to conduct any other lawful business that a limited partnership may conduct in the State of California; to provide a centralized management structure for all of such contributed and acquired property; and to provide a convenient mechanism for 4 RLP was formed in California and approximately 1 year later merged into a Nevada partnership with an identical partnership agreement. The parties make no distinction between the California and Nevada partnerships, and neither do we. 5 The parties have stipulated that RLP was formed and operated as a valid, legal entity under State law. Thus, we assume the validity of a partnership created by a single individual as the sole general partner and her revocable trust as the sole limited partner.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008