TBCblog

Comprehensive coverage of the Texas Business Court

Operated by

Reese Marketos LLP

Dallas, Texas  ·  Complex Commercial Litigation

Home Governance & Fiduciary Duties Derivative Standing Requires Contemporaneous Membership: Business Court Dismisses Claims After Buy-Sell Enforcement
Governance & Fiduciary Duties

Derivative Standing Requires Contemporaneous Membership: Business Court Dismisses Claims After Buy-Sell Enforcement

2026 Tex. Bus. 11 8th Div. Portrait of Hon. Jerry D. Bullard Judge Jerry D. Bullard Decided March 11, 2026 Mem. Op. Motion to Dismiss
Read the Court's Opinion (PDF)
Crain v. Northern Texas Business Court, 8th Division 25-BC08A-0014 active
By Joel Reese · July 28, 2026 Texas Business Court, 8th Division

In Crain v. Northern, the Business Court's Eighth Division granted a plea to the jurisdiction dismissing all derivative claims brought on behalf of three LLCs, holding that plaintiff Michael Crain lacked standing under Texas Business Organizations Code Section 101.463 because he was no longer a member when he filed suit following a court-ordered buy-sell transaction with an effective assignment date of December 19, 2024. The March 11 memorandum opinion reinforces the bright-line rule that derivative standing requires membership status at the time of filing, not merely at the time the underlying claims accrued.

Plea to the Jurisdiction Derivative Standing LLC Governance Section 101.463 Buy-Sell Agreements
Derivative Standing LLC Members Subject Matter Jurisdiction Membership Interest Valuation

Court Staff Summary

Granting the defendant's plea to the jurisdiction against the plaintiff's derivative claims on entities' behalf for lack of standing because the plaintiff was no longer a member of the entities when he filed suit.

Background: A Buy-Sell Transaction and Its Derivative Aftermath

Michael D. Crain filed suit in Tarrant County District Court on June 20, 2025, asserting both individual and derivative claims against his former business partner, William "Will" Northern. The derivative claims—including breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, conspiracy, and misappropriation of confidential information—were brought on behalf of three entities: Northern Crain Realty, LLC, Northern Crain Property Management, LLC, and Northern Crain, LLC (collectively, the "NC Entities"). But the case reached Division 8 with a critical procedural wrinkle: on February 2, 2026, Judge Bullard had already granted Northern's motion for summary judgment enforcing a buy-sell provision, ordering Crain to tender irrevocable assignments of his membership interests with an effective date of December 19, 2024—more than six months before Crain filed his lawsuit.

The Jurisdictional Challenge

Northern moved to dismiss Crain's derivative claims via plea to the jurisdiction, arguing that Crain lacked standing under Texas Business Organizations Code Section 101.463 because he had not been a member of the NC Entities since December 19, 2024. Crain's response took an unusual tack: rather than defending his derivative standing, he asked the court to reconsider its valuation of his membership interests in the underlying buy-sell summary judgment, arguing that "reconsideration of valuation necessarily precedes, and controls, Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction." The court rejected this framing, finding that valuation reconsideration was not a prerequisite to ruling on the standing question and addressing the motion for reconsideration separately.

The Court's Analysis: Membership at Filing Is Required

Judge Bullard's analysis was succinct and statutory. Citing In re LoneStar Logo & Signs, LLC, 552 S.W.3d 342, 347 (Tex. App. 2018), the court reaffirmed that "membership status at time of filing lawsuit [is] required for standing." The opinion emphasized that Section 101.463 addresses derivative proceedings "brought by a member" and that Section 101.452 provides statutory standing requirements for LLC members bringing derivative suits. The court reasoned:

Because Crain was not an NC Entities member at the time his derivative claims accrued, he lacks stake in the outcome of the derivative suit. Northern has affirmatively demonstrated that the Court lacks jurisdiction to hear Crain's derivative claims on behalf of the NC Entities.

The court noted that standing is a constitutional prerequisite to suit, and when a plaintiff lacks standing to assert a claim, the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction and must dismiss. Applying the standard for pleas to the jurisdiction—taking all evidence favorable to the plaintiff as true and determining whether the pleader has alleged facts affirmatively demonstrating jurisdiction—the court found Crain's membership termination on December 19, 2024, was dispositive.

Practical Significance for Texas Commercial Litigators

The decision underscores a critical timing issue in derivative litigation involving closely held entities. Practitioners representing LLC members in buy-sell disputes must consider whether to file derivative claims before a membership interest transfer becomes effective, even if that transfer is being contested. The opinion also illustrates the Business Court's willingness to enforce the bright-line membership requirement without regard to equitable arguments about valuation disputes or the merits of the underlying derivative claims. For defendants facing derivative claims from former members, Crain provides a clear roadmap: establish the plaintiff's non-member status at filing, and the derivative claims fall for lack of jurisdiction regardless of their substantive merit. Finally, the court's treatment of Crain's attempt to relitigate valuation as a jurisdictional prerequisite signals that procedural challenges will be resolved on their own terms, not conflated with merits-based reconsideration motions.