Friends, I’m here to tell you that at least in contracts, affirmatively blows major chunks. It’s redolent of bureaucratic, jargony pseudoassertiveness. In each of the following examples, obtained by dynamite fishing in the EDGAR lagoon, affirmatively is, uh, affirmatively redundant: … an individual who becomes a Covered Employee shall be automatically enrolled in the Plan, and will make Participant Contributions at … Read More
The word provision is used to describe something in a contract, but without being specific—I don’t think you can say it refers to a sentence or to a section. You can use provision in a contract, usually in the plural. Here are two examples: any additional shares of Common Stock issued and issuable in connection with any anti-dilution provisions in … Read More
MSCD 8.56 suggests that you might want to use the phrase reasonable efforts as a defined term: Even though the phrase reasonable efforts doesn’t pose the same risk of confusion as best efforts, you might want to use it as a defined term. Doing so could assist a court and might help the parties better understand the implications of using reasonable efforts. And in … Read More
You might recall that in this September 2015 post I discuss how Bryan Garner has defied anyone to produce a case in which including but not limited to has been held to introduce an exhaustive listing—in other words, a case in which the list following including but not limited to has been held to restrict the meaning of the general class. In … Read More
Today I noticed the following tweet by @ronfriedmann: Example of bad lawyer contract drafting. Is answer #DoLessLaw or #DoMoreLaw? pic.twitter.com/pmifezzDZ0 — ronfriedmann (@ronfriedmann) January 15, 2016 The quoted contract provision—and yes, it’s craptastic—caused me to don my full-face respirator and scurry to EDGAR, where I found lotsa contracts that use between or among the parties and variants. Here’s one: This Agreement … Read More
Linguistics nerdiness follows. Don’t say I didn’t warn you. Consider the following, at MSCD 13.551–.52: Black’s Law Dictionary defines reasonable as follows: “Fair, proper, or moderate under the circumstances.” So determining whether someone has acted reasonably requires an objective inquiry—you consider the circumstances, not the actor’s intent. That’s the meaning of reasonable as it’s used in, for example, a reasonable fee and in … Read More
The phrase there can be no assurance that is mealy-mouthed securities verbiage that has made its way into contracts. Some examples (with emphasis added): There can be no assurance that Holders generally, or any Holder in particular, will be given the opportunity to receive elective distributions on the same terms and conditions as the holders of Shares. There can be … Read More
Consider this (emphasis added), recovered from the EDGAR tar pits: If … , Ultimus may terminate this Agreement upon 60 days’ prior written notice [to the Trust]. Although that formulation is standard, I suggest it doesn’t make sense. In that case, termination wouldn’t happen when Ultimus—let’s take a moment to appreciate that name—notifies whomever it is. Instead, it would happen 60 … Read More
I wrote about intending to be legally bound in this 2012 post. Yep, it’s pointless, although note the bizarro Pennsylvania-law angle. It’s in fact Pennsylvania that has me revisiting intending to be legally bound. Reader Ben King told me about this post on the blog The Employer Handbook. It recounts how the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided that use of the phrase intending … Read More
The July–August 2015 issue of The Trademark Reporter contains my article, uh, commentary entitled Inures to the Benefit and Trademark Licensing. (Yeah, the no-italics part is a little awkward when the title is part of a sentence.) Now that a decent interlude has passed ,I can make it available to you, dear reader. Go here for a PDF copy. As I say in … Read More
