Utah Court of Appeals

Can a sole member override manager authority in Utah LLCs? Hardy v. Sagacious Grace Explained

2021 UT App 23
No. 20190063-CA
March 4, 2021
Affirmed

Summary

Hardy sought to purchase property from Sagacious Grace LLC, but the contract was signed by Leslie Mower, the sole member, rather than the designated manager. The district court granted summary judgment for defendants, finding the contract unenforceable because Mower lacked authority to bind the LLC.

Analysis

In Hardy v. Sagacious Grace, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed whether a sole member of a manager-managed limited liability company can bind the entity to a contract by claiming to act outside the ordinary course of business.

Background and Facts

David Hardy negotiated to purchase property from Sagacious Grace LLC (SG) for $150,000. Leslie Mower, SG’s sole member, signed the real estate purchase contract on behalf of the company. However, SG was a manager-managed LLC with LC Manager, LC serving as the sole manager, and Jami Ross managing LC Manager. When SG later repudiated the contract, Hardy sued to enforce it, arguing that Mower had authority to bind SG either as its manager or by exercising her statutory right as sole member to approve acts outside the ordinary course of business.

Key Legal Issues

The primary issue was whether Mower possessed actual or apparent authority to bind SG to the contract. Hardy argued that under Utah Code § 48-3a-407(3)(c)(ii), Mower could override the general management restriction by consenting to an act outside SG’s ordinary course of activities.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court affirmed summary judgment for defendants. Under Utah Code § 48-3a-407(3)(a), manager-managed LLCs vest exclusive decision-making authority in the manager. Mower lacked actual authority because she was not SG’s manager, and she lacked apparent authority because Hardy could have discovered through public filings that she was not the manager. Crucially, the court rejected Hardy’s statutory override argument because he failed to establish that selling property fell outside SG’s ordinary course of business. The record contained insufficient evidence about SG’s business purpose or activities, and Mower’s testimony that SG “simply holds land” suggested property sales could be within the ordinary course.

Practice Implications

This decision emphasizes the importance of verifying LLC management structure through public filings before contract execution. Practitioners should obtain and review the company’s certificate of organization and operating agreement to confirm signatory authority. When relying on statutory overrides for member action, parties must establish what constitutes the entity’s ordinary course of business through concrete evidence rather than speculation.

Original Opinion

Link to Original Case

Case Details

Case Name

Hardy v. Sagacious Grace

Citation

2021 UT App 23

Court

Utah Court of Appeals

Case Number

No. 20190063-CA

Date Decided

March 4, 2021

Outcome

Affirmed

Holding

A sole member of a manager-managed LLC cannot bind the company to a contract by invoking the statutory override for acts outside the ordinary course without establishing what constitutes the company’s ordinary course of activities.

Standard of Review

Correctness for questions of law regarding summary judgment

Practice Tip

When representing clients in LLC transactions, always verify the company’s management structure through public filings and ensure the proper signatory has authority before contract execution.

Need Appellate Counsel?

Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Related Court Opinions

    • Utah Court of Appeals

    State v. Ray

    July 29, 2022

    The enticement provision of Utah Code section 76-5-406(2)(k) is not unconstitutionally vague on its face, and denial of access to sealed medical records was harmless error.
    • Constitutional Rights (Criminal)
    • |
    • Discovery
    • |
    • Standard of Review
    • |
    • Statutory Interpretation
    Read More
    • Utah Court of Appeals

    Kubiak v. Pinson

    March 19, 2020

    An alternative affirmative defense asserting a set-off for PIP benefits does not constitute an admission of liability, and insurance evidence is inadmissible when offered solely to encourage more favorable jury verdicts.
    • Evidence and Admissibility
    • |
    • Summary Judgment
    • |
    • Tort Law and Negligence
    Read More
About these Decision Summaries

Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.