What, you want another example of a court mishandling its analysis of potential ambiguity? My SuperGuide post (here) wasn’t enough for you? OK, if you insist … Reader Zach Courson alerted me to a recent opinion of the North Carolina Business Court, Medfusion, Inc. v. Allscripts Healthcare Solutions, Inc., No. 14 CVS 5192, 2015 WL 1455680 (N.C. Super. Mar. 31, 2015) (PDF copy here). … Read More
In this post from last year I mentioned how I was about to start a program of one-on-one coaching with someone from the procurement department of a major company. A few months later, I did the same sort of thing with an associate from one of the big law firms. Yesterday I was asked if I would be available to do further … Read More
I noticed this post on Keith Bishop’s California Corporate and Securities Law blog, on the meaning of the verb “permits” in a proposed change to the securities regulations. Here’s the relevant bit of Keith’s post: The verb “permit” means to give assent to some action or event. This implies an affirmative action on the part of the registrant. Applying this … Read More
Yes, the phrase represents and warrants is a fixture in contracts. And it won’t disappear from the scene any time soon. But now that my article (this one) is out there, I can declare that represents and warrants is a zombie usage. And no, it’s not like one of those fast zombies. Fast zombies are badass. Instead, represents and warrants is like … Read More
My article Eliminating the Phrase Represents and Warrants from Contracts is now available. It’s in the latest issue of Transactions: The Tennessee Journal of Business Law. Go here for a PDF. This article shows that it’s pointless and confusing to use represents or warrants in a contract to introduce statements of fact. It recommends that instead you use states to introduce … Read More
In two ways, my approach to seminar testimonials has changed over the years. First, I no longer include the name and organization of the person providing a testimonial: I don’t think that information enhances the value of the testimonial, and I’m sure that many people who otherwise would give testimonials decline to do so because they don’t want me parading … Read More
Last week I noticed this post on Dewey B Strategic about Bloomberg BNA’s new product “Bloomberg Law: Corporate Transactions. (Gotta love the colon, which gives it an action-movie-sequel vibe.) For Bloomberg BNA’s own announcement, go here. Above is part of a post on Contract-Automation Clearinghouse. To see the rest, go here. Contract-Automation Clearinghouse is where I now put my posts on contract automation … Read More
I got another tip from a participant at the recent “Drafting Clearer Contracts” seminar in Houston, although I didn’t have the wit to note his name. He suggested that I check out the 2004 opinion in SuperGuide Corp. v. DirecTV Enterprises, Inc., by then Circuit Judge (now Chief Circuit Judge) Sharon Prost of the United States Court of Appeals for the … Read More
Last month I noticed with interest this article by Carol McAlice Currie in the Statesman Journal. It’s entitled “House Passes Bill to Standardize Oregon Contracts.” I recommend that you read the entire article, but here’s the gist of it: Building on a promise to bring more transparency and accountability to government, Rep. Nancy Nathanson delivered on it this week when the … Read More
To be consistent in your contract usages, you have to make decisions big and small. Here’s a small one: which to use, no later than or not later than? Behold what a Merriam-Webster “Ask the Editor” item (here) says: [T]here are differences in the way these two expressions are used. No later than is used more often than not later than, … Read More
