So you think your contract is airtight? A court may rule differently due to latent ambiguities in the contract language.
Recent federal appellate court ruling clarifies who decides whether a dispute can be arbitrated.
Three well-established legal doctrines may impact the enforceability of your contracts during an event like the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.
Whether contracting your kid to mow the lawn at home or executing a multi-million deal, you should probably read this blog post first for some important contract interpretation considerations.
Ignorance of the terms in a personal guarantee agreement likely won’t save you from paying up under Michigan law.
Breach of contract claims require plaintiffs to prove the contract existed, a breach occurred AND damage resulted, regardless who breached first.
Paying the debts of another is complicated business, especially under Michigan’s version of the statute of frauds.
Steer clear of inconsistent contract, tort and equitable theories in litigation to position your case for a successful and cost-effective outcome.
When the enforceability of a contract turns on a party’s “good faith,” these are much more than just words.
When it looks like a contract and reads like a contract, is it really a contract? Maybe not!
Wise business owners and members invest up front in well-crafted operating agreements.
Strategic advantage may be gained in contract disputes by deciding early whether to pursue arbitration.
Michigan Supreme Court reaffirms longstanding rules of contract law in arbitration agreements.
Despite careful review, fraudulent inducements can jeopardize otherwise well-crafted contracts.
When modifying a contract, best practice is to always detail changes in writing with appropriate approvals by all parties.
Caution is advised when reviewing contracts electronically, because that click, reply or e-signature could legally bind you to the deal.
Contracts should use plain English and your lawyer should too.
Integration clauses cannot typically be used to defend against fraud in the inducement claims to invalidate a contract.
Disclosure of the principal in a contract must occur to avoid agency liability.
Fat finger alert: In today's tech driven environment, a simple email acknowledgement could confirm acceptance of dispute resolution terms.
Is your company prepared to defend litigation stemming from an Internet data breach?
Include language in standard contracts to maximize the likelihood your company is paid in the event of a customer's financial distress or bankruptcy.
SubscribeRSS Plunkett Cooney LinkedIn Page Plunkett Cooney Twitter Page Plunkett Cooney Facebook Page
- Commercial Liability
- Business Risk Management
- Business Torts
- Commercial Real Estate
- Civil Litigation
- Real Estate
- Real Estate Mortgages
- Commercial Leasing
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- Commercial Loans
- Mortgage Foreclosure
- Shareholder Liability
- Class Action
- Product Liability
- Tax Law
- Fraud Activity
- Risk Management
- Cyber Attack
- Biometric Data
- Banking Law
- Statute of Limitations
- Internet Law
- Non-compete Agreements
- Consumer Protection
- Residential Liability
- Zoning and Planning
- Department of Education (DOE)
- Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
- Fair Credit Reporting Act
- Unfair Competition
- Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)
- Does Sympathy or Empathy Have a Place in the Courtroom?
- No Light Yet at End of COVID-19 Real Estate Tunnel
- When are Clear, Unambiguous Contracts Nonetheless Ambiguous?
- What the Future may Hold for Michigan Real Estate Foreclosures and Evictions
- The Dispute Subject to Arbitration, or is it? Who Decides?
- Illinois Supreme Court Slams Courthouse Door on Non-residents' Product Liability Claims Against Non-resident Defendants for Injuries Suffered Outside State
- Supreme Court Rules Fully Funded Pension Plans Cannot be Sued Under ERISA for Mismanagement
- A Day in Someone Else’s Shoes: Can Mortgagees Challenge Ad Valorem Assessments?
- Landlords may be able to Recover Future Damages Even After Tenants Vacate Leased Premises
- A Deeper Dive Into Minority Owner Oppression Claims