Blog

Document Assembly—Q&A with Laura N. Williams, General Counsel and Director of Legal Professional Services, Ixio Corporation

One unfortunate aspect of my life as a drafting ronin is that my workload is so utterly varied and unpredictable that I’m not able to use most of the information-technology tools that promise to brighten the life of the contract drafter. I’ve remained outside the candy store, with my nose pressed against the window. In particular, I’ve long admired from … Read More

Contract Lifecycle Management—Q&A with Ashif Mawji, President of Upside Software Inc.

For this first post in an occasional series about contract lifecycle management (for more background, see this introductory post), Ashif Mawji, president of Upside Software Inc., was kind enough to take the time to speak with me. Q: Ashif, your contract lifecycle management (CLM) product is UpsideContract, which is now in Version 5. In a nutshell, what does it aim … Read More

Yet More on “Indemnify” and “Hold Harmless”

[Update: For my 2012 take on this topic, see this post.] In an October 2006 post I discussed the terms hold harmless and indemnify. I noted that Black’s Law Dictionary states that the two terms have the same meaning whereas Mellinkoff’s Dictionary of American Legal Usage says that one can also distinguish the two terms—that “hold harmless is understood to … Read More

More on “Hold Harmless” and “Indemnify”

In a recent post I discussed the terms hold harmless and indemnify. I noted that Black’s Law Dictionary states that the two terms have the same meaning whereas Mellinkoff’s Dictionary of American Legal Usage says that one can also distinguish the two terms—that “hold harmless is understood to protect another against the risk of loss as well as actual loss” … Read More

One Space or Two?

[Updated January 12, 2015, to integrate what had previously been bracketed updates.] In A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting 12.21, I recommend that you use only one space, rather than two, after punctuation, whether it separates two sentences (periods, question marks, exclamation marks) or parts of a sentence (colons). I’m hardly alone in this. The Chicago Manual of Style … Read More

“Hereby Indemnifies” and “Shall Indemnify”

In my recent post on hold harmless I quoted the Black’s Law Dictionary definition of indemnify: “1. To reimburse (another) for a loss suffered because of a third party’s or one’s own act or default. 2. To promise to reimburse (another) for such a loss. 3. To give (another) security against such a loss.”) This definition reminded me of an … Read More

“Hold Harmless” and “Indemnify”

[Update: For my more recent take on this issue, see this 2012 post.] At a seminar I gave last week, I suggested that hold harmless and indemnify are essentially synonyms. Some participants were skeptical, so I thought I’d better research the issue. Black’s Law Dictionary supports my view. It defines hold harmless as follows: “To absolve (another party) from any … Read More

Getting Rid of the “Successors and Assigns” Provision

[Update June 17, 2013: Go here for the June 15, 2013 post about my article It’s Time to Get Rid of the “Successors and Assigns” Provision.] [Update April 12, 2013: For more recent posts about the “successors and assigns” provision, see “The ‘Successors and Assigns’ and Successor Liability” (here) and “The Illinois Appellate Court’s Problematic Take on the Traditional Recital of Consideration and ‘Successors … Read More

“From the Beginning of Time” and “At Law or in Equity”

Recently someone asked me about settlement and release agreements, and that put me in mind of a picturesque drafting usage that’s a fixture of release language—from the beginning of time, as in “Jones hereby releases Acme from any claims … arising from the beginning of time to the date of this agreement.” I searched for this phrase in the material … Read More

The Concept of “Tested” Contract Language

In the past ten days, I have twice had people mention to me, in the course of conversation, the notion of “tested” contract language. The idea is that while contract prose could certainly be improved, changing it would be risky—traditional contract language has been litigated, or “tested,” and so has a clearly established meaning (is “settled”). This argument has long … Read More