Sometimes inspiration comes from unlikely sources. Here’s an exchange I saw on Twitter: “Upon information and belief” is how a great deal of attorneys begin interrogatory answers or open paragraphs in complaints or motions…this suggests to me that a lawyer crafted this tweet, which is frightening in itself… — Liz Homsy (@Lizzidi) April 1, 2020 […]
Limitation-of-Liability Overkill
Wearing my LegalSifter-advisor hat, I’ve been looking at what people try to cover in limitation-of-liability provisions—in other words, what they won’t be responsible for. Here’s what I’ve come up with in half an hour of rooting around on EDGAR: Consequential damages Special damages Direct damages General damages Indirect damages Incidental damages Punitive damages Exemplary damages […]
An Ontario Court of Appeal Decision Involving “The Greater of A or B”: Andros v. Colliers Macaulay Nicolls Inc.
Thanks to Kim Reid, general counsel at Signalta Resources Limited, a private Calgary energy company, I belatedly learned of a troubling 2019 decision by Justice Fairburn of the Ontario Court of Appeal, Andros v. Colliers Macaulay Nicolls Inc., 2019 ONCA 679, 2019 (Westlaw PDF here; the court’s PDF here). It involves interpretation of this termination […]
More “Endeavours” Twaddle
Regular readers of this blog will be familiar with Glenn West. When it comes to analysis of contract boilerplate with big-deal implications, no one comes close to Glenn. But Glenn has a mischievous side. He’ll sporadically send me stuff that he must know will irritate me; I imagine him hitting “Send” with a bit of […]
“Effluxion of Time”
I was frittering time away on Twitter last night, when out of the blue this tweet from @IPDpdraughts came my way: Last week I saw an “affluxion of time” in a contract. — Mark Anderson (@IPDraughts) January 27, 2020 “Affluxion of time”? Some rooting around showed me that affluxion of time does indeed exist, although with […]
“Not Subject to a Reasonableness Standard”
Today I saw another way to make it clear that you want a party to waive the implied duty of good faith: Shipper, at its sole discretion and not subject to a reasonableness standard, may determine whether the goods may be salvaged, and if salvageable, the value of such salvage. For reasons I explain in […]
Don’t Use “Both … And” As a Linking Expression
In various ways, the word both comes in handy in contracts. It’s used to express universal quantification in contracts with two parties: No amendment to this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and executed by both parties hereto. And you can use both to make it clear whether you’re referring to one or […]
The Redundant “Only” in Language of Obligation
Be on the lookout for the redundant only in language of obligation. Consider this: The Tenant may move furniture, fixtures, and equipment into and out of the Premises [only] during nonbusiness hours unless Landlord gives approval otherwise. [Prompted by D.C.’s comment I moved only, but that’s unrelated to the topic of this post.] Omitting only […]
Now Available: My Law-Review Article “Interpreting and Drafting ‘Efforts’ Provisions: From Unreason to Reason”
The summer 2019 issue of The Business Lawyer—the law review published by the Business Law Section of the ABA—contains my article Interpreting and Drafting Efforts Provisions: From Unreason to Reason. Go here for a PDF. No one has ever offered an even halfway serious attempt to explain a distinction between different efforts (or endeavours) provisions, […]
Another Kind of “Including” Ambiguity
I noted with interest an article entitled “Including Without Limitation” (in this issue of The Transactional Lawyer), by Stephen L. Sepinuck of Gonzaga University School of Law. I’ll discuss later in this post the part about including without limitation. But let’s start with what is for me the more interesting part—the last two columns, in […]