business start up

...now browsing by tag

 
breach of contract case breach of contract lawsuit business breach of contract business contract review business formation business incorporation business law business lawsuit business litigation business start up Buy a Franchise buying a franchise buying a franchised business confidentiality agreement corporate bylaws corporate formation corporate litigation corporate start up covenant not to compete federal franchise law franchise agreement franchise arbitration franchise attorney Franchise Disclosure Document franchise dispute franchisee franchise future royalties franchise law franchise law firm franchise lawyer franchise litigation franchise your business FTC Franchise Rule limited liablity company maryland breach of contract maryland business maryland business law Maryland franchise registration non solicitation agreement operating agreement selling a franchise sell your franchised business shareholder agreement small business attorney small business lawyer
 

So You Want to Start Your Own Business

Monday, February 24th, 2020

1.Why incorporate?

The first question a Maryland prospective business owner may ask is “why should I incorporate?”  The reason to incorporate one’s business is to achieve limited liability, which means that a business owner is liable to third parties only up to the amount that the individual has invested in the business.  A person that owns a business individually puts all of his or her personal assets at risk in the event the business fails.  By incorporating, a business owner’s personal assets are shielded from creditors of the business in the event the business is unable to meet its debts as they become due.

2.What form should my business take?

After making the decision to incorporate, a prospective business owner must ask “what corporate form should my business organization take?”  Businesses can take the form of a corporation, partnership, or limited liability company (LLC).  (As an aside, LLCs are creatures of statute that are organized, not incorporated, and therefore are not considered corporations as the term is legally defined.  Nevertheless, LLCs do enjoy the same limited liability advantages as corporations and partnerships, and are therefore included as part of the discussion as what form a business should take.)

In order to determine what form your business should take, you should consult an experienced business accountant and corporate attorney, since each form of business has separate advantages and disadvantages, as well as differing tax treatment.  There is no exact answer for every business owner, as each determination can be made only on the unique facts of that business owner’s situation.

Once the choice is made as to corporate form, business owners can search the Maryland SDAT website for name availability at  www.sdatcert3.resiusa.org/ucc-charter/.

After determining whether a corporate name is available, forms for Articles of Incorporation (for corporations), Articles of Organization (for an LLC) and Certificate of Organization (for partnerships) can be found at www.dat.state.md.us/sdatweb/sdatforms.html#entity.  The Articles must be filed with the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation along with the appropriate fee.

3.Once filed and approved, a federal tax identification number will usually be required for the business.  You can obtain one electronically within 30 minutes in most cases at www.irs.gov.

4.Finally, with whatever business structure you choose, applicable corporate documents must be drafted to memorialize the agreement between the parties, ie a shareholder agreement for shareholders of a corporation, a partnership agreement for partners in a partnership, or an operating agreement for members of an LLC.  These agreements are a pivotal step in the start-up process, as it will in many cases be the only document that defines the exact business relationship between the parties.  Crafting such a document requires the expertise of a business lawyer.  Other tasks that a business attorney may perform at the outset on behalf of business clients are the registration of trademarks and service marks, as well as obtaining fictional (d/b/a) names.

 

Posted in business law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Buy-Sell Provisions in Corporate Shareholder and LLC Operating Agreements

Monday, February 24th, 2020

I am often asked by clients who own their own businesses how to address the circumstances surrounding the transfer of ownership if one of the owners dies, becomes disabled, or whose employment in the business is terminated for-cause?  The answer is through the use of language addressing buy-sell situations that are included in an Operating or Shareholder Agreement.

A carefully drafted buy-sell provision will address the buyout of a deceased or disabled owner’s share of the business, usually through the use of the proceeds of life and disability insurance policies taken out by the business on the lives of the owners.  A buy-sell provision will also address termination of an owner’s employment with the business for-cause.  A sample buy-sell paragraph will read something like the following:

“Sale of Shares on Death, Disability or Termination of Employment.  If, during the term of this Agreement: a) a Shareholder dies or becomes permanently disabled (meaning the Shareholder becomes unable to carry out his duties as a Director or Officer of the Company for a period of 90 consecutive days or more); or b) a Shareholder who is also an employee of the Company has his or her employment terminated by Company for-cause, then the Company shall buy, and the Shareholder, his estate or the named representative of the Shareholder shall sell, the Shares of said Shareholder to the Company.”

A buy-sell provision will go on to address how to arrive at the price at which an owner’s shares may be sold for, as well as whether such price will vary depending on the circumstances surrounding the owner’s departure from the business.

A well-drafted buy-sell provision will also address an owner’s potential divorce, so as to prevent remaining owners from having to own and operate the business with the spouse or other family member of a former owner.

Every LLC Operating Agreement and Corporate Shareholder Agreement should address the buy-sell provisions referenced above.  This will go a long way towards solving many potential disputes involving circumstances associated with the transfer of ownership of a business before they arise.

 

Posted in business law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Drafting Corporate Documents

Monday, February 24th, 2020

A Maryland corporation or LLC need only file Articles of Incorporation/Organization with Maryland Department of Assessment and Taxation in order be lawfully incorporated.  Once formed, it is advisable that every Maryland entity consult with a Maryland business attorney to discuss the drafting of a set of Bylaws, as well as a shareholders’ agreement or operating agreement.

Maryland law mandates that each Maryland corporation must have a set of Bylaws that lay out the procedures concerning the governance of the corporation.  A Maryland corporation’s Bylaws may contain any provision not inconsistent with law or the charter of the corporation for the regulation and management of the affairs of the corporation.

A Maryland corporation’s Bylaws usually set out the powers, duties, rights and obligations of its directors and officers, including how many directors the corporation may have, the procedure for calling shareholder and Board of Director meetings, how and where corporate records are to be maintained, stockholder reports, voting and proxy procedures, how stock may be transferred, how directors are elected and removed, how officers are appointed and removed, as well as numerous other matters related to the corporation as a whole.

A Maryland corporation may, but is not required to, have a shareholders’ agreement.   A shareholders’ agreement is an agreement between the stockholders of a corporation that governs the rights and obligations of the shareholders.  First and foremost, a shareholders’ agreement will state the individual equity in the corporation as held by the shareholders.  A shareholders’ agreement typically states how new shares of stock are issued, and addresses issues surrounding restrictions on stock repurchase and transfer, including how stockholders of a company may sell their shares, what happens to the shares upon the death or disability of a shareholder, whether other shareholders have the right to purchase another shareholder’s stock upon death or disability, what procedures are used in order to assign value to stock shares, and what happens to stock upon the breach of a shareholder agreement by a stockholder.

A shareholders’ agreement will also govern how the day-to-day operations of the company are managed, how a Board of Directors will be elected and terminated, what decisions require majority, super-majority or unanimous consent of the shareholders, how the Board will appoint Officers of the corporation.

The resolution of shareholder disputes through mediation, arbitration or litigation, or a combination thereof, may also be included in a shareholders agreement, as well as what law governs any dispute.

When you are in the start up and formation stages of your new business, consult with your business attorney regarding the drafting of Bylaws and a shareholders’ agreement.

 

 

Posted in business law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Reviewing a Commercial Lease

Monday, October 29th, 2018

When reviewing a commercial lease on behalf of a business tenant client, my goal is twofold: to obtain the most favorable terms possible for my client in the short term, while also protecting the client’s long term interests by limiting risk and personal exposure in the event of an unforeseen event that hurts or derails the business.

These are some of the issues I look to in my review:

  1. Make sure all lease terms mirror the terms found in the Letter of Intent executed by my client and the landlord.
  2. Attempt to obtain an abatement of rent for a period of a minimum of 60 days, to as much as 180 days if possible. Regardless of the rent abatement, at minimum we also want to make sure that the rent commencement date, which is the first date rent is due, is pushed far enough out to make sure we are open and operating at that time.
  3. Attempt to obtain tenant improvement money, which is money paid by the landlord to my tenant client and which the tenant must use to build out and renovate the premises. The amount of any TI money can fluctuate dramatically depending on how much work the space needs, and the business of the tenant.
  4. Understand whether we are dealing with a gross (“all-in”) lease where the tenant makes one monthly payment including everything due, or a triple net lease (“NNN”) where rent and CAM fees and taxes and insurance are broken out separately, or a hybrid of the two? Oftentimes a client can be confused about what the monthly payments actually are and not understand terms like additional rent, operating costs, and CAM fees.
  5. What about the HVAC unit, which in many instances can be a costly repair or replacement in the event the tenant takes on the responsibility to maintain and replace the HVAC if it breaks down. I recommend an inspection of the HVAC prior to signing the lease, as well as some warranty period where the landlord guarantees the operation of the HVAC.
  6. Is the tenant free to sublease a portion of the premises without landlord interference?
  7. Is there a liquidated damages clause in the event the lease is terminated early? This would mean that the tenant is on the hook for the entire remaining term for rent and all other expenses due and owing in the event of default.
  8. If this is a retail establishment, does my client tenant have exclusivity? In other words, is the landlord prohibited from permitting the operation of another wings place in the same plaza that my client who sells wings is in?
  9. Finally, there is most likely a personal guaranty.  Do spouses and even silent partners have to sign it? Is there a cap on it or is it unlimited?  I normally try to negotiate some type of cap on the guaranty.  Six months to one year’s worth of rent is oftentimes a manageable “out” for a tenant looking to get out from under a lease for a dying business.

Posted in business law, franchise law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Subcontracting Agreements / Master Agreements

Friday, October 26th, 2018

How do business owners handle subcontracting agreements when the subcontractor may work on several different projects for several different clients of the Contractor, simultaneously or over a period of years?  The answer is to tweak the standard Subcontractor Agreement to make it a “master” agreement, so that it covers not just the first project, but future projects as well.  Here is some language I add:

WHEREAS, Contractor and Subcontractor (the “Parties”) agree that for mutually agreed upon Clients, Contractor may choose to utilize Subcontractor with respect to certain Services specifically set forth herein and in any Statement of Work attached to this Agreement;

WHEREAS, Contractor and Subcontractor desire to enter into a master agreement that sets forth the terms and conditions pursuant to which Contractor and Subcontractor shall, for mutually agreed upon Clients, provide certain Services to one or more of Contractor’s clients;

Statement of Work.  The parties will memorialize the Subcontractor work in the attached Statement of Work (a “Statement of Work” or “SOW”) that is entered into between the parties and is incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement.  Contractor may issue a purchase order (“Purchase Order”) with the mutually agreed upon and signed Statement of Work attached for all work to be performed by Subcontractor under this Agreement.  A SOW, if and only to the extent then followed by a Purchase Order, constitutes the only authorization for Subcontractor to take any action that will result in any expense to Contractor.  Any SOW shall be substantially in the form of the representative SOW attached as Exhibit A to this Agreement and shall reference this Agreement and shall specify: (a) the overall project description and Subcontractor’s requirements for the services; (b) the services to be performed, including materials to be provided, by Subcontractor; (c) the charges or billing rates and payment milestones for the services performed by Subcontractor; (d) the location(s) where the services are to be performed;  (e) the acceptance criteria and warranty provisions for such work; (f) anticipated start and finish dates; and (g) any other information and/or associated terms and conditions that may be required by the circumstances of a particular Statement of Work.

Posted in business law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What You Need to Know About Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Business Certification

Thursday, October 23rd, 2014

Service Disabled Veteran-Owner Business (“SDVOB”) Certification Requirements:  

1. The service-disabled veteran must have a service-connected disability that has been determined by the Department of Veterans Affairs or Department of Defense

2. The service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern must be small under the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code assigned to the procurement;

 3.The service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern must also be at least 51% owned by one or more service-disabled veterans or, in the case of any publicly owned business, at least 51% of the stock of which is owned by one or more Service-Disabled Veterans.

 4.Management and daily business operations of the service-disabled veteran-owned business concern must be controlled by one or more Service-Disabled Veterans or, in the case of a veteran with a permanent and severe disability, the spouse or permanent caregiver of such a veteran.

5. The service-disabled veteran must hold the highest officer position in the small business concern.

 6.Further:

 To be an eligible SDVOSBC the following must be met:

  • The management and daily business operations of the concern must be controlled by one or more service-disabled veterans.
    • Control by one or more service-disabled veterans means that both the long-term decision making and the day-to-day management and administration of the business operations must be conducted by one or more service-disabled veterans
    • The management and daily business operations of which are controlled by one or more service-disabled veterans or, in the case of a service-disabled veterans or, in the case of a service-disabled veteran with permanent and severe disability, the spouse of permanent caregiver of such veteran
  • Service-disabled veteran means a veteran with a disability that is service-connected.
  • Ownership must be direct. Ownership by one or more service disabled veterans must be direct ownership.
    • A concern owned principally by another business entity that is in turn owned and controlled by one or more service-disabled veterans does not meet this requirement.

GSA Certification as SDVOB:

GSA does not require formal certification, instead they allow a business to self-certify.  Go to www.sam.gov for more information. 

 SDVOSB program — bidding firm is responsible for self-certifying or representing to the contracting officer that it is a service disabled veteran owned small business concern.

 -Self-certification can be achieved through SAM

 -Under the SDVOSB program, the bidding firm is responsible for self-certifying or representing to the contracting officer that it is a service disabled veteran owned small business concern. A firm can do this by simply self-certifying through the government’s System for Award Management (SAM) – by declaring that it meets the definition of a service disabled veteran owned small business.

 Dept. of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) Certification

 Veterans First Contracting Program requires verification of veteran status and placement in VetBiz database.  Agencies cannot require certification by the VA.

 The Veterans First Contracting Program, which applies only to VA acquisitions and requires verification of veteran status through the VA in its Vendor Information Pages or VetBiz database. Agencies, other than VA, cannot require certification by the VA or placement in the VetBiz database.

 Veterans First Contracting Program:

 -Applies only to VA acquisitions

 -Provides sole-source authority to the VA and permits restricted set-asides to both SDVOSBs and VOSBs

 -Establishes contracting goals unique to the VA

 -7% for veteran owned businesses; 10% for service disabled veteran owned businesses

 -Requires veteran status to be verified by the VA

 

 

 

 

Posted in business law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Use the IRS 20 Factor Test to Determine Employee or Independent Contractor Status

Thursday, October 23rd, 2014

Before your company can legally classify a worker as an independent contractor instead of an employee, serious research and analysis must be undertaken. Be sure to review and apply the IRS guidelines below to the specific job which you are considering independent contractor status for. Go through each factor and analyze the job on a step by step basis before arriving at a conclusion. Remember, this is a balancing act, so make sure the scale tilts significantly in your favor before solidifying IC status for your personnel:

IRS 20 Factor Test

  1. Instructions.  Workers who must comply with your instructions as to when, where, and how they work are more likely to be employees than independent contractors.
  2. Training.  The more training your workers receive from you, the more likely it is that they’re employees. The underlying concept here is that independent contractors are supposed to know how to do their work and, thus, shouldn’t require training from the purchasers of their services.
  3. Integration.  The more important that your workers’ services are to your business’s success or continuation, the more likely it is that they’re employees.
  4. Services rendered personally. Workers who must personally perform the services for which you’re paying are more likely employees. In contrast, independent contractors usually have the right to substitute other people’s services for their own in fulfilling their contracts.
  5. Hiring assistants. Workers who are not in charge of hiring, supervising, and paying their own assistants are more likely employees.
  6. Continuing relationship. Workers who perform work for you for significant periods of time or at recurring intervals are more likely employees.
  7. Set hours of work. Workers for whom you establish set hours of work are more likely employees. In contrast, independent contractors generally can set their own work hours.
  8. Full time required.  Workers whom you require to work or be available full time are likely to be employees. In contrast, independent contractors generally can work whenever and for whomever they choose.
  9. Work done on premises.  Workers who work at your premises or at a place you designate are more likely employees. In contrast, independent contractors usually have their own place of business where they can do their work for you.
  10. Order or sequence set.Workers for whom you set the order or sequence in which they perform their services are more likely employees.
  11. Reports.  Workers whom you require to submit regular reports are more likely employees.
  12. Payment method.  Workers whom you pay by the hour, week, or month are more likely employees. In contrast, independent contractors are usually paid by the job.
  13. Expenses.  Workers whose business and travel expenses you pay are more likely employees. In contrast, independent contractors are usually expected to cover their own overhead expenses.
  14. Tools and materials.  Workers who use tools, materials, and other equipment that you furnish are more likely employees.
  15. Investment.  The greater your workers’ investment in the facilities and equipment they use in performing their services, the more likely it is that they’re independent contractors.
  16. Profit or loss.  The greater the risk that your workers can either make a profit or suffer a loss in rendering their services, the more likely it is that they’re independent contractors.
  17. Works for more than one person at a time. The more businesses for which your workers perform services at the same time, the more likely it is that they’re independent contractors.
  18. Services available to general public.  Workers who hold their services out to the general public (for example, through business cards, advertisements, and other promotional items) are more likely independent contractors.
  19. Right to fire.  Workers whom you can fire at any time are more likely employees. In contrast, your right to terminate an independent contractor is generally limited by specific contractual terms.
  20. Right to quit. Workers who can quit at any time without incurring any liability to you are more likely employees. In contrast, independent contractors generally can’t walk away in the middle of a project without running the risk of being held financially

Posted in business law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

MBE/DBE Certification – Know the Law Before You Apply

Thursday, October 23rd, 2014

Many clients come to me only after their DBE/MBE certification has been denied, or after the application has been filed.  Often times this is too late.  Nevertheless, Federal regulations provide you with a guide on exactly how to achieve MBE/DBE status.  All you need to do is follow it.   What follows is the key provision from the regs, 49 C.F.R. 26.69:

(a) In determining whether the socially and economically disadvantaged participants in a firm own the firm, you must consider all the facts in the record, viewed as a whole.

(b) To be an eligible DBE, a firm must be at least 51 percent owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.

(1) In the case of a corporation, such individuals must own at least 51 percent of the each class of voting stock outstanding and 51 percent of the aggregate of all stock outstanding.

(2) In the case of a partnership, 51 percent of each class of partnership interest must be owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. Such ownership must be reflected in the firm’s partnership agreement.

(3) In the case of a limited liability company, at least 51 percent of each class of member interest must be owned by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.
 
(c) The firm’s ownership by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals must be real, substantial, and continuing, going beyond pro forma ownership of the firm as reflected in ownership documents. The disadvantaged owners must enjoy the customary incidents of ownership, and share in the risks and profits commensurate with their ownership interests, as demonstrated by the substance, not merely the form, of arrangements.
 
(d) All securities that constitute ownership of a firm shall be held directly by disadvantaged persons. Except as provided in this paragraph (d), no securities or assets held in trust, or by any guardian for a minor, are considered as held by disadvantaged persons in determining the ownership of a firm. However, securities or assets held in trust are regarded as held by a disadvantaged individual for purposes of determining ownership of the firm, if—
 
(1) The beneficial owner of securities or assets held in trust is a disadvantaged individual, and the trustee is the same or another such individual; or
(2) The beneficial owner of a trust is a disadvantaged individual who, rather than the trustee, exercises effective control over the management, policy-making, and daily operational activities of the firm. Assets held in a revocable living trust may be counted only in the situation where the same disadvantaged individual is the sole grantor, beneficiary, and trustee.
 
(e) The contributions of capital or expertise by the socially and economically disadvantaged owners to acquire their ownership interests must be real and substantial. Examples of insufficient contributions include a promise to contribute capital, an unsecured note payable to the firm or an owner who is not a disadvantaged individual, or mere participation in a firm’s activities as an employee. Debt instruments from financial institutions or other organizations that lend funds in the normal course of their business do not render a firm ineligible, even if the debtor’s ownership interest is security for the loan.
 
(f) The following requirements apply to situations in which expertise is relied upon as part of a disadvantaged owner’s contribution to acquire ownership:
(1) The owner’s expertise must be—
(i) In a specialized field;
(ii) Of outstanding quality;
(iii) In areas critical to the firm’s operations;
(iv) Indispensable to the firm’s potential success;
(v) Specific to the type of work the firm performs; and
(vi) Documented in the records of the firm. These records must clearly show the contribution of expertise and its value to the firm.
(2) The individual whose expertise is relied upon must have a significant financial investment in the firm.
 
(g) You must always deem as held by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual, for purposes of determining ownership, all interests in a business or other assets obtained by the individual—
(1) As the result of a final property settlement or court order in a divorce or legal separation, provided that no term or condition of the agreement or divorce decree is inconsistent with this section; or
(2) Through inheritance, or otherwise because of the death of the former owner.
 
(h)  (1) You must presume as not being held by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual, for purposes of determining ownership, all interests in a business or other assets obtained by the individual as the result of a gift, or transfer without adequate consideration, from any non-disadvantaged individual or non-DBE firm who is—
(i) Involved in the same firm for which the individual is seeking certification, or an affiliate of that firm;
(ii) Involved in the same or a similar line of business; or
(iii) Engaged in an ongoing business relationship with the firm, or an affiliate of the firm, for which the individual is seeking certification.
(2) To overcome this presumption and permit the interests or assets to be counted, the disadvantaged individual must demonstrate to you, by clear and convincing evidence, that—
(i) The gift or transfer to the disadvantaged individual was made for reasons other than obtaining certification as a DBE; and
(ii) The disadvantaged individual actually controls the management, policy, and operations of the firm, notwithstanding the continuing participation of a non-disadvantaged individual who provided the gift or transfer.
 
(i) You must apply the following rules in situations in which marital assets form a basis for ownership of a firm:
(1) When marital assets (other than the assets of the business in question), held jointly or as community property by both spouses, are used to acquire the ownership interest asserted by one spouse, you must deem the ownership interest in the firm to have been acquired by that spouse with his or her own individual resources, provided that the other spouse irrevocably renounces and transfers all rights in the ownership interest in the manner sanctioned by the laws of the state in which either spouse or the firm is domiciled. You do not count a greater portion of joint or community property assets toward ownership than state law would recognize as belonging to the socially and economically disadvantaged owner of the applicant firm.
(2) A copy of the document legally transferring and renouncing the other spouse’s rights in the jointly owned or community assets used to acquire an ownership interest in the firm must be included as part of the firm’s application for DBE certification.
 
(j) You may consider the following factors in determining the ownership of a firm. However, you must not regard a contribution of capital as failing to be real and substantial, or find a firm ineligible, solely because—
(1) A socially and economically disadvantaged individual acquired his or her ownership interest as the result of a gift, or transfer without adequate consideration, other than the types set forth in paragraph (h) of this section;
(2) There is a provision for the co-signature of a spouse who is not a socially and economically disadvantaged individual on financing agreements, contracts for the purchase or sale of real or personal property, bank signature cards, or other documents; or
(3) Ownership of the firm in question or its assets is transferred for adequate consideration from a spouse who is not a socially and economically disadvantaged individual to a spouse who is such an individual. In this case, you must give particularly close and careful scrutiny to the ownership and control of a firm to ensure that it is owned and controlled, in substance as well as in form, by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual.

 

Posted in business law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Time Limits and NDA/Confidentiality Agreements

Friday, June 8th, 2012

It is common for companies to share confidential information with a third party in order to achieve an operational objective, where the third party may be a prospective joint venturer, an acquirer, an investor or even a client.  Prior to disclosing such confidential information, however, these same companies usually require the execution of a confidentiality/non-disclosure agreement by the other party.

This blog has previously discussed issues surrounding confidentiality/non-disclosure agreements.  Today’s topic however is specific: the time limits, if any, that should be considered in such agreements.

Most companies if given a choice would prefer to include in their  NDA/confidentiality agreements a perpetual term, which essentially means that the confidential information can never be disclosed by the third party except in limited circumstances.  Often times however, this desire is diluted in the course of negotiations, leading to a final agreement containing just a limited time for confidentiality, ie, for example, 2, 5 or even 10 years. 

Unbeknownst to such parties, agreeing to this watered-down time limit may lead to substantial future risks with regard to confidential information.  An example is the California case of Silicon Image, Inc. v. Analogk Semiconductor, Inc.   In furtherance of its goal to protect its confidential information, Silicon Image took numerous prudent steps to protect its trade secrets, including: i) requiring its own employees, customers and business partners to sign confidentiality agreements; ii) maintaining a key card access system and by requiring visitors to sign in to protect its trade secrets; iii) protecting computer systems through network security and access control; iv) labeling confidential proprietary information and watermarking all information disclosed outside the company with the name of the individual receiving the information; and, v) providing training sessions to employees on its trade secret protection program.

Yet in spite of its strict adherence to the protection of its confidential information, Silicon Image decided to limit the term of its confidentiality agreements to a set number of years, instead of a perpetual term, due to the fact that that’s what other high-tech companies were doing, and due to the fact that many partners, investors and other third parties pushed back and refused to execute non-disclosure agreements containing a perpetual duration of confidentiality.

Despite its best practices described above, Silicon allowed itself to frequently enter into confidentiality agreements with terms of 2 to 4 years, which proved to be a serious error when the time came for Silicon to seek a preliminary injunction in California Court against a competitor it alleged misappropriated its confidential information.

In denying Silicon’s request for a preliminary injunction, the Court analyzed whether Silicon Image made reasonable efforts to protect its confidential information.  One of the key factors the Court focused on was whether or not the non-disclosure agreements between Silicon Image and its customers and distributors provided adequate protection.  Unfortunately for Silicon, the Court concluded that reasonable steps to protect trade secrets were not shown by Silicon, pointing particularly to the time limits included in its confidentiality agreements.

The Court held that “one who claims that he has a trade secret must exercise eternal vigilance,” requiring all persons to whom a trade secret becomes known to acknowledge and promise to respect the secrecy in a written agreement.  A time limit contained in an NDA demonstrated to the Court that Silicon’s own expectations of maintaining its trade secrets were time limited and, thus, a failure to demonstrate “eternal vigilance” over its trade secrets. 

As a result, Silicon lost a serious case in its attempt to protect its confidential information.  The moral of this story is a simple one.  Companies who include time limits in their confidentiality agreements do so at their peril.  In order to avoid the Silicon Image outcome, it is prudent to stand firm and refuse to include a set time limit for the receiving party’s obligations to maintain the confidential information.  The best practices are for the trade secret owner to insist that the obligation to maintain confidentiality survive as long as the information disclosed qualifies as a trade secret under the requirements of applicable law.

Posted in business law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Legal Standard for Fraud in Maryland

Wednesday, March 7th, 2012

To prevail on a claim of fraudulent misrepresentation in Maryland, a plaintiff must establish, by the heightened evidentiary standard of clear and convincing evidence:

“(1) that the defendant made a false representation to the plaintiff, (2) that its falsity was either known to the defendant or that the representation was made with reckless indifference as to its truth, (3) that the misrepresentation was made for the purpose of defrauding the plaintiff, (4) that the plaintiff relied on the misrepresentation and had the right to rely on it, and (5) that the plaintiff suffered compensable injury resulting from the misrepresentation.”  VF Corp. v. Wrexham Aviation Corp., 350 Md. 693, 703 (1998), quoting Nails v. S&R, 334 Md. 398, 415 (1994).

The defendant must actually be aware of the falsity, or atleast the potential for falsity.  The requirement concerning knowledge of the falsity or reckless indifference as to the truth of the representation means either the defendant’s actual knowledge that the representation was false or the defendant’s awareness that he does not know whether the representation is true or false. Ellerin v. Fairfax Savings, 337 Md. at 231, 652 A.2d at 1124.  

Negligence or misjudgment, “‘however gross,'” does not satisfy the knowledge element. Ellerin, 337 Md. at 232, 652 A.2d at 1125, quoting Cahill v. Applegarth, 98 Md. 493, 502, 56 A. 794, 796 (1904). See also VF Corporation and Blue Bell, Inc. v. Wrexham Aviation Corp., 350 Md. 693 (1998).

A defendant must have the intent, the scienter, to cheat another: “It is well recognized under Maryland law that an action for fraud cannot be supported … without any design to impose upon or cheat another.”  VF Corp. v. Wrexham Aviation Corp., 350 Md. 693, 703 (1998).  

The complaining party though, must have reasonably relied on the defendant’s representations.  To determine whether one party’s reliance upon the allegedly fraudulent statements of another party is reasonable, a court looks to all the facts and circumstances present in the particular case.  “In determining whether reliance is reasonable, a court is required to view the act in its setting….” Parker v. Columbia Bank, 91 Md. App. At 361-362. 

The One of the most important circumstances in this regard is the plaintiff’s background and experience.  For example, a complaining person who is knowledgeable in the commercial real estate realm could not be said to have reasonably relied on another’s false representations in that realm, as the complainant would have the requisite knowledge and resources to determine whether such statements were true in the first place.

 

 

Posted in business law, franchise law | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

« Older Entries