Skip to main content

Calling All Consultants! You Need a "Form" Consulting Contract! (A BUSKLAW Newsletter Aside)




I'm fortunate to have many contacts on LinkedIn, and many present themselves as "consultants." That term is broad enough to encompass such heavy hitters as Accenture on one hand to a retired respected Meijer vice president on the other.

But all consulting firms - whether large or small or somewhere in between - have one thing in common: they need an effective "form" contract for their clients. The reason? To state, in plain language, the necessary business and legal provisions that govern their relationship. The purpose of these provisions?

First, to state the parties' rights and duties applicable to the consulting services to be provided. 

Second, to avoid a disruption to the parties' relationship down the road by preempting problems before they occur. 

Do you think that consulting agreements must be lengthy and dense? Balderdash! 😏

An acceptable consulting contract, especially for smaller engagements, can be as short as 2-3 pages. I know because I've drafted them for my clients. And I can do the same for you. In fact, I'll draft a "form" consulting contract for you to use with your clients for a $250.00 fixed fee. (Certain conditions apply; those are stated here.) Just email me at busklaw@charter.net.

So how can I afford to price my contract-drafting services so low? Because I regard the preparation of "form" consulting contracts as a "loss leader" and hope that you'll use me for future legal work. No mystery there. Thanks. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The BUSKLAW May Newsletter: Is There a Moral Imperative to Plain English? Part 1 - Examples

"The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed." 

Thus begins Stephen King's epic story of the gunslinger, Roland Deschain, and the popular Dark Tower series of novels describing his adventures. But King didn't have to write this sentence that way; he could have consulted with the typical lawyer, politician, or company PR department first. Had he done so, the sentence may have appeared so:

"The bad hombre who was dressed mostly in dark clothing and running fast across an arid land was pursued by a multi-armed, extremely dangerous, and notorious vigilante."
The difference in these two sentences is clear. King's concise short sentence creates an image that grabs the reader's attention and raises provocative questions. Who is the man in black? Who is the gunslinger? Why is he after the man in black? But the Bizarro World Stephen King sentence - with its ethnic slur, passive voice, ambiguity, suppositions, and superfluous adjectives …

The BUSKLAW July Newsletter: Horsing Around with Non-Compete Clauses

Non-compete provisions are part and parcel of many employment agreements. But these provisions must be carefully drafted to be enforceable. There are three sure-fire ways to have a court invalidate your non-compete clause without much judicial cogitation:
Failure to provide a reasonable duration for the clause;Failure to restrict the operation of the clause to a reasonable geographic area; andFailure to establish a protectable business interest as the subject of the clause.The first point is easy to grasp. In Michigan, you are on solid legal ground if the duration of your non-compete clause doesn't exceed one year. And you are probably okay if you add a year to that. But you're walking on quicksand if your non-compete provision lasts longer than two years. 
The second point is a bit more complicated. Courts don't like to enforce a non-compete clause if its geographical scope is too wide. For example, if I'm in the packaged ice business and sell my product mostly to retai…

The BUSKLAW September Newsletter: Lawyers and Their Goofy Words - and What to Do About It

Growing up, I was told that lawyers were smart cookies. After all, getting a law degree isn't an easy task. You first go to college and find a subject that is best suited to how your brain works so that you can maintain a high GPA. In my case, I quickly discovered that I wasn't a good fit for the "hard sciences." So I took a lot of Political Science and English courses, learned how to write fairly well, suffered through the tedious law school aptitude test on October 20, 1973, graduated with a B.A. degree in 1974 and then went on to law school. There, I endured a legal education infused with the Socratic method (here's an example), suffered occasional migraines (because some of my law professors were truly smart but couldn't teach) and graduated with my law degree on Mother's Day, 1977. Passed the Michigan bar exam and by God, became an honest-to-goodness lawyer in November of 1977!

So having gone through undergraduate studies, law school, and the bar exam…