December 24, 2009 in Business, Legal Articles by admin

Business Lawsuits and Fault Finding

Lawsuits seem to be as common as the cold these days. Nowhere is that more evident than when it comes to people suing businesses for a perceived wrong.

If anyone has taken the time to read some of the warnings printed on products or in user’s manuals, the inevitable conclusion is that someone must have actually “done” some of the harebrained things listed as being a hazard (and sued over it) or it wouldn’t be mentioned. This should give one pause when thinking about the law and how it is supposed to protect us from grave injustices and remedy personal injury wrongs, etc.

Sadly, a great many businesses these days are under a virtually constant threat of being sued for something; incidents that could range from scalding coffee being spilled, to a person slipping, tripping and falling outside a business. Some of these lawsuits may very well be frivolous, some may not. Really, most businesses these days need to know what to do about customers or clients blaming them for client errors or things beyond anyone’s control.

Nowhere is this risk more evident than when it comes to products liability cases. In this area of the law, manufacturers are in the position where they must tell an end user how to use their product, and how “not” to use it. They are also required to warn people what may happen if they misuse an item.

Gone are the days when a product maker could assume a consumer would use the product for its intended purpose. Nowadays, the things people think of to do with some products are utterly unbelievable and may cause serious personal injuries or death.

Manufacturers are now in the awkward position of trying to “guess” what a consumer “may” do with their item that could harm them. Quite a stretch of the imagination in many cases, but that is how far the law in this area has gone. For example, who would have thought that a consumer would use a portable chain saw propped up at the top end of a metal pole to try and trim tree branches or use a hair dryer while asleep?

Simply put, the law in the 21st century mandates that a business protect itself from some really ridiculous happenstances. After assuming the worst case scenario, a business must then guess what might happen and then issue a warning. In instances like this, it’s obvious that manufacturers are going to have to also assume their consumers are none too bright. However, having said that, there is a large gap between what products liability law says and how it gets applied.

Thankfully the law doesn’t say that a business has to guard against personal injuries or a death as the result of a consumer’s bad or poor judgment. However, when a case gets to court, it may be a different story and the consumer will triumph. For this and many other reasons, it only makes good common sense to discuss any personal injury case or products liability case with a skilled personal injury attorney.

It’s best to make sense of a bad situation in the eyes of how the law is applied prior to assuming something that might not be the case in actual practice when all is said and done. Put another way, have a well seasoned business attorney create systems, procedures and company policies to deal with those “frivolous” cases that defy explanation to even a reasonable person.

To learn more, visit Lawbarron.com.

December 20, 2009 in Business, Legal Articles by admin

Recession Proof Business Income

Cash during a recession is a rare and appreciated thing.

It’s when economic setbacks hit that one really finds out how well run a business happens to be. It’s essential for them to be paid on time and get the money right to the bank. Now is not the time to cut corners on things like sound advice from a Sacramento business lawyer. It doesn’t cost that much to draft a set of tightly knit terms and conditions to make sure the company is running well and in the black.

There are definitely several matters that need to be included in such a legal document. One of those is to make sure the terms and conditions laid out are the terms of the actual “business” for performing and delivering on its contract, not the terms of clients or customers.

=Definitely lay out very precisely when payment is expected for services or products. Chances are the terms the company was initially following were a tad too generous. For example, many invoices state payment is due 30 days after the date the invoice was sent.

Doing the math will reveal that those terms may delay payment by up to two months. This is a serious impediment to cash flow, so reducing the payment period to 14 days makes a great deal of sense, and this is something a Sacramento business lawyer will explain. Since cash is what drives a business and keeps it afloat, tightening up the terms and conditions of payment is a smart business move.

While some companies feel that charging interest on unpaid bills is “not the thing to do to upset a customer,” there is a legal right to charge for that interest. When doing this, include all the pertinent details, such as the amount of charges and how they are applied, etc. Interest rates should also be laid out very clearly in any terms and conditions.

Never rely on a verbal contract because despite what people may think, it could end up being a binding contract. The terms of agreements made under those conditions are enforceable under some circumstances. Instead, have any contract entered written by a Sacramento business lawyer.

The terms and conditions have been spelled out clearly, or have they? This is something that needs to be checked. If the terms and conditions are not as clear as one would think, there may be ways to circumvent them. What any business should hope to accomplish with their terms and conditions is to have them so clear that there is no way they would land in court in the first place. This can be accomplished by an experienced Sacramento business lawyer.

Never assume that because any terms and conditions that have been written for the business are clear to customers or clients. This may not be the case. The firm has to take steps to ensure anyone that does business with it are totally aware of the terms and conditions under which the firm operates. This will go a long way toward avoiding any potential disagreements. With firm terms and conditions in place and by adhering to them, economic recovery is just that much easier in the long-term.

To learn more, visit Lawbarron.com.

December 18, 2009 in Business, Legal Articles by admin

Schwarzenegger Veto Prevents State Bar from Raising Dues

Alan Insul, a Los Angeles attorney limiting his practice to business, corporate, and real estate, provides pertinent commentary on California Governor’s recent decision to veto a state bar membership dues bill that would have extended the State Bar’s authority to collect annual membership dues through 2010.

On October 13, 2009, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed SB 641, which would have extended the California State Bar’s authority to collect annual membership dues through 2010. Schwarzenegger explained in his letter to Senate that he was returning the measure by Sen. Ellen Corbett, D-San Leandro, without his signature “because the State Bar cannot continue business as usual.”

While the State Bar has enough funds to continue functioning through 2009, Los Angeles attorney Alan Insul, who is limiting his practice to business, corporate, and real estate cases, says that the veto “seems a bit like overkill” and that a “compromise between the Legislature and Governor,” should be worked out soon.

The governor opined that “inefficiencies remain unaddressed” and that the State Bar maintained a “political agenda.” Governor Schwarzenegger also alluded to Sharon Elyce Pearl, the State Bar’s former director of real property, who was charged in April 2009 with one count of embezzlement and six counts of filing false tax returns in the Alameda County Court. She faces up to nine years in prison if convicted on all counts. The governor went on to reference the media leak of the Fifth District Court of Appeal Justice Charles Poochigian’s “not qualified” rating by the State Bar’s Judicial Nominees Evaluation Commission. Poochigian, a former Republican state senator representing the Fresno area, was nominated August 20, three days after the MetNews reported his rating in a column by Editor Roger M. Grace. Schwarzenegger said the commission “by failing to follow the law, damaged its reputation for impartiality and, in turn, the State Bar’s.”

“Some of the points made by Governor Schwarzenegger are difficult to argue with, and certainly possess merit, but the fact is, the State Bar should not be prevented from functioning as normally as possible next year,” Insul asserts, “while scrutiny of the State Bar is essential, so is the State Bar’s role in the state’s justice system, as the governor himself has acknowledged.”

“I’m sure that our State Bar will be reexamining the problems that the governor has noted, but we’re all hopeful that his veto has not placed our very system in any jeopardy,” Insul concludes.

To learn more, contact Los Angeles business attorney and California corporate lawyer, Alan M. Insul by visiting Insullaw.com.

December 12, 2009 in Business, Legal Articles by admin

Worst Recession Since the Great Depression Affecting Lawyers Too

Alan Insul, a Los Angeles lawyer limiting his practice to business, corporate, and real estate cases, offers some candid commentary about his law firms dealing with new economic realities.

It’s tough out there, even for lawyers. From major law firms to small firms, excess is being trimmed in order to better facilitate a nouveau climate urging more cautious business expenditures for legal advice. “The nation’s businesses are pulling in their collective horns beneath the juggernaut of our longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression,” asserts Alan Insul, a Los Angeles lawyer limiting his practice to business, corporate, and real estate cases, “I find that many clients are shedding large law firm representation and looking toward smaller firms for efficient and more cost-effective legal representation.”

A survey of the nation’s top 250 law firms bears out what Insul is saying. During the past year, these apex firms have shed 5,259 lawyers from their payrolls, a drop of 4%. This is the largest lawyer retention downturn since the National Law Journal began collecting such information in 1928 – just prior to the dismal Great Depression. Two other distinct declines, both in the neighborhood of 1 percent, were recorded during the early 1990s. One firm, Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson lost 168 lawyers, a decline of 26.4%.

Other firms are cutting billing rates and pay for associates by up to 20%, primarily in response to clients’ concerns about cutting the costs of legal services.

“It’s a challenging marketplace we’re in now, and a changing one. Clients, in looking toward smaller firms, while not willing to sacrifice on quality, nevertheless are coming to appreciate that the smaller more nimble firm is by definition more flexible, and can very often handle most, if not all, of the same matters previously handled by larger firms,” Insul explains.

During the early 1930s and especially in mid-1937 during the so-called “second wind” of the Great Depression, lawyers too were embroiled in a bleak scenario featuring bread lines and soup kitchens, and a chronic lack of steady employment even for the most qualified and best trained among them. Nowadays, the outlook is more positive for lawyers, especially those willing to make some adjustments. “Making some of these adjustments can even lead many firms and their clients to a stronger business position overall,” Insul concludes.

To learn more, contact Los Angeles business attorney and California corporate lawyer, Alan M. Insul by visiting Insullaw.com.

December 10, 2009 in Business, Legal Articles by admin

What Statute of Limitations Applies?

A recent secured real property case decision by the Court of Appeal of California’s Third Appellate District in Schmidli v. Pearce establishes a split between appellate districts on whether a 10 or 60 year statute of limitations applies to a lender’s recorded trust deed if the deed’s maturity date of the obligation secured by the trust deed are not stated in the recorded trust deed.

In the case of Nancy A. Schmidli et al. v. Rodney K. Pearce et al. recently decided by California’s Court of Appeal in the Third Appellate District (San Joaquin), the plaintiffs sought to extinguish a lien of deed of trust held by defendants against their property. Schmidli et. al. claimed that the defendants’ lien had expired under a 10-year statute of limitations triggered by defendant’s recording of a notice of default employing as a rationale that the “record” from which to determine the maturity date of the obligation secured by the trust deed included any recorded document that disclosed the debt’s maturity date, including a notice of default.Defendants countered that a 60-year statute of limitations applied if the last date fixed for payment of the debt is not expressly set forth within the recorded trust deed. With this line of reasoning intact, their notice of default did not trigger the 10-year statute, and their lien remained viable under a 60-year statute of limitations.

Two previous appellate decisions addressed this issue and reached different results. Slintak v. Buckeye Retirement Co., L.L.C. LTD. (2006) concluded a notice of default triggered a 10-year statute. Ung v. Koehler (2005) determined a notice of default did not trigger a notice of default where the notice was recorded after the 10-year period had expired and the trust deed failed to provide the maturity date of the debt, and therefore, the 60-year statute applied.

The trial court relied upon Slintak and granted a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. Although the notice of default in this case was recorded before the 10-year period expired, the court concluded that Ung’s precedent was the better reasoned authority, and so reversed the judgment.

Because of this decision, a split between appellate districts on whether a 10 or 60 year statute of limitations applies to a lender’s recorded trust deed against real estate where that trust deed fails to provide for a maturity date of the loan. Although the California legislature has changed the statute to clarify 60 years as the term of maturity in the event that the trust deed failed to state a maturity date and regardless as to whether or not a subsequent notice of default so indicates, a significant number of trust deeds still recorded prior to the change are in existence which must be interpreted based upon the district where recorded unless there is further clarification from the California Supreme Court.

Roni Balint writes for the Law Office of Alan M. Insul. The content contained within this feature is not intended as legal advice and does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. To learn more, contact Los Angeles business attorney and California corporate lawyer, Alan M. Insul by visiting Insullaw.com.

December 10, 2009 in Business, Legal Articles by admin

Personal Injury at the Worksite

Everywhere you turn these days there is construction of some type under way. Accidents on the jobsite happen regularly and to deal with the damages, you need an excellent Sacramento personal injury lawyer.
One of the leading occupations in the U.S. today is working in the construction industry. Whether it’s on a road crew or a building crew, the workplace is fraught with the possibilities of having an accident. While most work sites do strive for a good safety record, things happen. Those things could include a fall from unsafe scaffolding, electrocution from an improperly wired cord, or a crush injury as the result of a load slipping from the sling of a crane.

It’s a fact that being in the construction industry is a nod to putting your life on the line to get the job done. No one wants to be hurt or injured while on the work site and most workers do use caution to avoid the most obvious of possible accidents. It’s the things that happen unexpectedly that may cause devastating personal injury or death.

Not all work site accidents are life threatening or serious. They may just relate to repetitive strain injury or pulled muscles from lifting the wrong way. Nevertheless, hazards continually stalk every construction site.
The most common accident on a construction site is falling. While the height might not be that great in terms of distance to fall, even a short distance may result in severe injuries or death, e.g. traumatic brain injury due to the head hitting a solid object. Falling objects are another very common happenstance at a work site. This could include everything from bricks to iron girders. Most often this injury comes as a surprise to the worker who suddenly gets hit from above.

Equipment failure or failure to operate it in the right manner is another area fraught with accidents waiting to happen. The older the equipment and the faster the worker tries to work, the higher the chances of an accident. As well, working on a construction site involves manual labor, often tough physical demands on a daily basis, which may result in lifting strains and overall wear and tear on a body.

Factor in chemical spills that may include lubricants, toxic cleansers, or other deadly substances that may cause either immediate problems (respiratory) or long-term difficulties, such as lung cancer. Along with spills, of course, come the real hazard of fires and explosions. What happens post-accident and how should those injured get compensation?

Post accident problems may include expensive medical bills, missed work and thus lost wages, inability to perform again at a pre-accident level, the loss of personal days and sick days to handle the injury, and the very real possibility that others on the construction site won’t want the “accident” reported, etc.
As you can see, it’s a real can of worms. This is why it is very important, critical in fact, to get a skilled Sacramento personal injury lawyer. They can run interference for you when it comes to dealing with insurance companies who don’t want to pay out on a personal injury claim. They will also explain your rights to you and what you may expect if your case proceeds to court.

Deborah Barron is a Sacramento business lawyer, Sacramento employment lawyer, and Sacramento winery lawyer in California. To learn more, visit Lawbarron.com.

December 2, 2009 in Business, Legal Articles by admin

Does Fiduciary Duty Enter a Zone of Insolvency?

The recent decision by the California Court of Appeal, Berg & Berg Enterprises v. John Boyle et al., a reaffirmation of California earlier Trust Fund doctrine and rejecting the so-called “zone of insolvency” approach of other jurisdictions when defining the scope of when and to what extent to fasten duties owed by boards of directors of near insolvent corporations to its creditors.

The October 29, 2009, decision rendered by the California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District, in the case Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC versus John Boyle et. al. concluded that Berg failed to plead a cognizable claim for breach of fiduciary duty against the individual directors (John Boyle et. al.) of Pluris Inc. being sued.

The Berg case was born out of a dispute between Berg & Berg, a real estate developer, and Pluris, a Silicon Valley-based start-up company engaged in the business of developing advanced network routers. Pluris dissolved in 2002, a victim of a depressed sector economy as its financing efforts and product development efforts “tanked.” Berg alleged that it became Pluris’s largest creditor when its predecessor-in-interest, MWP, agreed to build and then lease two office buildings in San Jose, California, to Pluris and Pluris allegedly repudiated the lease agreement and subsequently made an assignment of its entire assets for the benefit of its creditors. Berg retaliated initially by attempting to file an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding against Pluris to try to exploit approximately $50 million in net operating losses. When the involuntary bankruptcy proceeding was dismissed, Berg litigated, claiming in state court that Pluris’s directors had breached fiduciary duty, alleging that the directors had failed to conduct a reasonable probe into the proposal to pursue the Berg bankruptcy plan for the intent of preserving the net operating losses. After several additional challenges, the actions were dismissed due to Berg’s “failure to state a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty” and Berg appealed.

On appeal, Berg raised the theory that directors of a corporation owe a fiduciary duty to the corporate creditors even before the corporation is actually insolvent and merely in the “zone of insolvency” so as to vitiate the normally singular duty owed to shareholders. The rule was originally posted in a Delaware Chancery court in the case of Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland N.V. v. Pathe Communications Corp., 1991 Del. Ch. Lexis 215 (Del. Ch. Dec. 30, 1991). In rejecting the invitations to expand directors duties before actual insolvency, the court instead reaffirmed California’s “Trust Fund” approach which rejects a fiduciary duty to creditors and merely fasten liability where the assets which otherwise could have been used to satisfy creditors is in some way diverted, dissipated or put at undue risk.

Roni Balint writes for the Law Office of Alan M. Insul. The content contained within this feature is not intended as legal advice and does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. To learn more, contact Los Angeles business attorney and California corporate lawyer, Alan M. Insul by visiting Insullaw.com.

December 2, 2009 in Business, Legal Articles by admin

Whiplash, the Unseen Injury

People think whiplash isn’t that serious because they can’t see it.

While many think that whiplash is a silent wound and not that serious because it’s not visible, it is one of the more common injuries sustained in car crashes. Whiplash damage turns the most mundane of tasks into a painful activity and affects daily living. This is why a great majority of whiplash victims tend to file personal injury claims with a Sacramento personal injury lawyer.

What usually happens when two vehicles collide is that the impact causes you to be propelled forward rapidly (acceleration) then slapped backwards suddenly (deceleration). This whipping movement strains back muscles, shoulders and the neck, violently pulling these muscles out of shape.

Whiplash symptoms don’t always show up immediately. It may take a couple of days for the victim to realize what has happened. This kind of damage also takes a long time to heal, depending on the violence of the impact. When it comes to whiplash injuries, no two people are alike and they may act and react differently to the injury, based on their pain threshold and the flexibility of their neck muscles.

Hit from behind? If that is the case, then the person who collided with you is always liable for the crash. If you suffered whiplash because of this accident, then in most cases, you have the option to file a whiplash injury claim. If you’re not certain what to do, speak to a highly skilled Sacramento personal injury lawyer.

While there are places that represent themselves as being a whiplash claims company, you are best advised to speak to a qualified Sacramento personal injury lawyer who knows the law. When it comes to the possibility of negotiating a settlement with the insurance company or even proceeding to court, having a competent Sacramento personal injury lawyer representing you will go a long way toward a fair and just settlement.

Whiplash claims companies are only in the business of collecting information to pass along to an attorney. Why waste time and money with these claims companies when the first consultation with a knowledgeable lawyer is free?

Some of the things that your Sacramento personal injury lawyer would discuss with you are the details of the case, find out how much time you lost from work, get your medical records and get a detailed list from you about any other expenses you had to pay out of your own pocket, e.g. massage therapy or paying for a neck brace.

While it’s true that getting compensation won’t take the pain away from a whiplash injury, it will help pay for lost wages, doctor’s bills and other expenses. This is one of the main reasons you need to consult with a Sacramento personal injury lawyer to know what your rights are in relation to a whiplash claim.

Deborah Barron is a Sacramento business lawyer, Sacramento employment lawyer, and Sacramento winery lawyer in California. To learn more, visit Lawbarron.com.