It’s been a while since I’ve done a blog post about or. Well, the drought is now over, thanks to readers who alerted me to the opinion of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Rooney v. ArcelorMittal S.A. (here). What was at issue was the language of a statute, not a contract. Specifically, section 131(1) of the Securities Act, which … Read More
What better way to take a break from the Seminarpocalypse® than to travel some more, this time to a conference? Earlier this week I was in Chicago for Clio Cloud Conference 2016, which ran on Monday and Tuesday. Legal-conference travelogues generally don’t make for compelling reading, but here goes anyway. Speaking I was at the conference because @JoshuaLenon had invited … Read More
Earlier this week I was at Clio Cloud Conference 2016. I’ll tell you about that soon, but for now, I just want to make available a link to the interview I did there with Laurence Colletti (@LaurenceEsq) of Legal Talk Network, all 17 minutes and 50 seconds of it: go here. I had fun recording it; thanks to Laurence for making … Read More
In his most recent post on Weil’s Global Private Equity Watch (here), Glenn “Iceman” West discusses a recent Second Circuit opinion relating to Chesapeake Energy’s redemption of $1.3 billion in notes based on Chesapeake’s interpretation of the notes’ supplemental indenture. The supplemental indenture designates the period between 15 November 2012, and 15 March 2013 as the “Special Early Redemption Period.” … Read More
My San Francisco seminars are on Wednesday, 7 December (“Drafting Clearer Contracts”) (more information here), and Thursday, 8 December (the “Advanced” seminar on the categories of contract language) (more information here). Until today, on the Public Seminars page of this site I gave the dates as one day later than they actually are. I’m sorry for any confusion that caused, … Read More
Via this post on the Delaware Corporate & Commercial Litigation Blog, I learned about a recent opinion of the Delaware Court of Chancery that’s relevant to how one goes about making the benefits of a contract available to members of a corporate group. Here’s what MSCD 2.55–.56 has to say about that: It’s commonplace that a member of a group of … Read More
[Updated 9 March 2021] Recently a handful of people have in passing expressed to me the same sentiment: they don’t always agree with me. Given how often I hear this, I’ve long thought that my epitaph should be, “People didn’t always agree with him.” It seems pointless simply to tell me that you don’t always agree with me. What am I supposed … Read More
Normally I don’t comment publicly on any kind of writing other than that contained in contracts. I have my hands full as it is. But I was on the receiving end of a cry of despair on Twitter: An example or really lame legalese. Who writes these things @KonciseD ? https://t.co/ukofrUMgiY — Winstonian Smith (@W1nstonian) September 3, 2016 Here’s what … Read More
Because (@FlemingMF) posted on my blog way back in the early days, I’ve been in the habit of referring to him as “the ur-commenter.” But since I’m perhaps one of 227 people in this country familiar with use of ur– as a prefix, I’ve decided that “Commenter Zero” is a better moniker. Wear it with pride, Michael. In any event, for … Read More
I’ve been prone to using the phrase contracts professional as a way to refer collectively to (1) lawyers who work with contracts and (2) contract managers. But I’m not keen on the term. When used as a noun, the word professional is slippery. In its narrowest sense, it’s used to refer to those who work in fields that require some sort of certification—lawyers, … Read More
