One of the categories of contract language is language of recommendation. It’s discussed at MSCD 3.332, and I introduced the idea in this 2011 post. Obviously enough, you use it when one party is recommending something to another party: The Company recommends that the Participant consult with his or her personal advisor …. I’ve always though that language of recommendation … Read More
These days I mostly get my inspiration from contracts and from caselaw, but books by others can also be a source of useful ideas. Seeing as I’m in Australia, I just purchased on Kindle the third edition of Modern Legal Drafting: A Guide to Using Clearer Language, by Peter Butt, emeritus professor at the University of Sydney and the doyen of … Read More
It’s routine for one post to beget another. My post on shall not negligently (here) was prompted by the following contract language: Company will not, and will not knowingly or negligently allow any third party to [do various things]. In a comment, David Ziff considered the implications of using just shall not allow, with negligently omitted. I agree with David. On … Read More
While analyzing the usages in a contract I pulled from EDGAR (more about that in due course), I spotted the following: Company will not, and will not knowingly or negligently allow any third party to [do various things]. But does it make sense to impose an obligation on someone not to act negligently? Is that equivalent to imposing an obligation … Read More
If I argue that a particular contract usage can create confusion, it’s nice when I can point to a court opinion that inadvertently confirms as much. So I was delighted when cousin Joshua Stein sent my way one such opinion, 383 Madison LLC v. The Bear Stearns Companies, Inc., a 2008 New York Supreme Court slip opinion (here). It involves … Read More
[Update: For my definitive take on this subject, see my article Eliminating the Phrase Represents and Warrants from Contracts, 16 Tennessee Journal of Business Law 203 (2015).] Yes, I know that I’m getting tiresome, they way I harp on about represents and warrants, like a dog worrying a bone. But I have a new element to add to my analysis. At … Read More
Today @KentPitman shared the following thought with me: I used to do programming language standardization both nationally and internationally. I noticed some German speakers had a particular attitude (I’d almost say phobia) around the use of the word “will” as a compulsion. They never explained it and seemed to think it was obvious, so I’m not certain, but I eventually came … Read More
Episode 5 of the third season of the U.S. TV show “Suits,” set in a corporate New-York-but-actually-Toronto law firm, features the following exchange between the character Louis Litt, a goofy transactional partner (played by Rick Hoffman), and an associate by the name Simon, after Louis thrusts in Simon’s face an unspecified written assignment that Simon had submitted to Louis: Louis: … Read More
A couple weeks ago the following tweet was sent my way by @UtterlyMacabre: Many IT Ks have an “assumptions” section that functions like a disclaimer. What category of contract language would you call this? Shortly thereafter, @UtterlyMacabre disappeared from the Twitterverse. Too bad, because I thought that was a clever question. Before disappearing, @UtterlyMacabre steered me to two statements of … Read More
[Updated August 9, 2013: I bow to the wisdom of the commentariat! “Acme shall purchase” it is.] Acme and WidgetCo enter into a contract providing for Acme’s purchase of 1,000 widgets. WidgetCo delivers the widgets to Acme, along with an invoice. Acme pays the invoice. In that scenario, when does Acme purchase the widgets? I propose having the contract say, … Read More
