Skip to main content

The BUSKLAW Newsletter: What We Discussed in 2018


'Tis the week before Xmas and a good time to look back on the topics that we covered in 2018. So have some eggnog (or a nice Pinot Noir), play this Xmas music, and let's reminisce: 

>January: we reviewed recent cases proving that in a contract, every word has meaning.
> February: we discussed the best response when you receive an unsolicited product idea from a customer.
>March: we pondered the scenario of whether a disgruntled buyer of a haunted house can sue and get some relief.
>April: we examined the effect of an "immortal soul clause" buried in a website's terms and conditions.
>May: we discovered that mere pressure to sign a contract isn't sufficient to void the contract for duress.
>June: No post - on family business.
>July: We found out what happens when you horse around with non-compete clauses.
>August: No post - on family business.
>September: We determined what you can do about lawyers who use goofy words.
>October: We sussed out whether "efforts" provisions in contracts are worth the drafting effort. 
>November: We examined why your accounts payable folks should be familiar with the contractual doctrine of accord and satisfaction.
>December:  We explained why, in a contract, a "condition" does not a "promise" make.

Apart from my advocacy of plain language in drafting contracts, my goal with this posts is to discuss a court case or contract law doctrine that is relevant to my target audience: those who work with contracts and would like a better understanding of what they mean.

The sad truth is that all too often business contracts: 1) are relegated to an electronic or physical file cabinet, never to see the light of day unless there's a problem; and 2) contain legal jargon that at worst is meaningless and at best frustrates the reader's understanding of the contract's content, regardless of whether the reader is a layperson, a judge, or a lawyer. In 2019, we'll continue the good fight to change this predicament! 
___________________________________

If you find this post worthwhile, please consider sharing it with your colleagues. The link to this blog is www.busklaw.blogspot.com and my website is www.busklaw.com. And my email address is busklaw@charter.net. 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…

A BUSKLAW Newsletter Aside: Is Your Website Compliant with the European Union's GDPR?

Effective 25 May 2018, the EU's General Data Protection Regulation goes into effect. The GDPR is a big deal and quite complicated. There are 99 articles and 173 recitals defining the privacy rights of individuals and data controllers’ and data processors’ obligations. 

Are you a U.S.-baseddata controller or data processor subject to the GDPR? You are a “data controller” if you, alone or jointly with others, determine the purpose and means of “processing” personal data of EU individual customers or businesses. The threshold is that you offer goods or services to customers or businesses in the EU (including the UK, despite Brexit) and collect their personal data. But even if you don’t sell goods or services to EU customers but engage in marketing or monitoring activities involving EU individuals’ personal data, you are covered by the GDPR.

You are a data processorif you “process” personal data on behalf of a “data controller,” i.e., a data controller contracts with you to process pers…