Iowa-Microsoft Opening Statements Delayed

The opening statements in the Iowa Mircosoft litigation were delayed today.  Pre-trial instructions took hours.  Check out Brett Trout's blog.  He sat in on the trial today.

Here is something to keep in mind.  If opening statements are tomorrow, I'll bet that Roxanne Conlin takes all the day and more to give her opening.  The jurors will go home having heard only the Plaintiffs' side of the story the first weekend.  The only way this doesn't happen is if Judge Rosenberg dismisses the jurors for the day after the remaining instructions.  First impressions are lasting impressions.

Opening Statements In Iowa Microsoft Trial

Opening statements in the Iowa consumer class action case against Microsoft begin November 30, 2006.  Several readers each day have been hitting this blog reading posts relating to the case.  To make it easier for readers I have added a Microsoft Iowa Litigation category on the right side of the blog.  This should make it much easier to identify all the posts related to the litigation.

I will cover important highlights of the trial as it proceeds.  The trial is expected to last six months.  Of recent note, it is my understanding that Judge Rosenberg has ruled Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer will only be required to testify once in the trial.  The Plaintiffs' attorney, Roxanne Conlin, had wanted to complete her case-in-chief before allowing Microsoft attorneys the opportunity to question Gates and Ballmer fully.  This is helpful to Microsoft as it allows the defense to complete any necessary rehabiliation of these two key witnesses before she completes her side of the case. 

On the other hand, Conlin won a procedural victory in that she is able to present deposition testimony of Gates from 1998.  This infamous deposition does not protray Gates in the best light and is considered by many as damaging to Microsoft.  Conlin also gets to present a mountain of emails, many of which are considered damaging to Microsoft.  For the jurors sake, let's hope the parties only present a portion of the 25 million documents that have been gathered. 

Microsoft will counter with the many innovations the company has created and how Gates and Co. positively transformed the computing world.

The Plaintiffs are asking for over $300 million in damages so there is no question this case will be hotly contested.  It has been in the court system for nearly seven years and right now I wouldn't doubt it could go for seven more, no matter who wins at trial.

For those interested in more on the Microsoft case you may want to check out Iowa patent lawyer Brett Trout's blog, Blawg IT.  Brett has periodic articles on the case and always has an interesting take. 

The Secret of Negotiation: Care Less, Get More

In December's issue of Inc. Magazine, Norm Brodsky describes a paradox of successful negotiation.  The less interest you have in doing a deal, the more likely you are to get one you'll find difficult to refuse.

Brodsky is considering selling his businesses (records storage, secure document-shredding and delivery).  He turned down an offer from a major corporation because they would not buy the delivery business.  A VC firm then approached Brodsky.  Brodsky explained to the VC partner why they should buy all three of the businesses, set his price and then told the VC partner he would not negotiate.

A short time later the VC partner shot Brodsky an offer several million dollars below the asking price.  Brodsky didn't respond.  The VC firm then inquired about why Brodsky had not responded and Brodsky again informed them he would not negotiate.  He really didn't care if he sold his businesses or not. Low and behold, the VC firm agreed to the price and the deal is in the due diligence phase.

This lesson is applicable in business litigation as well.  If you are willing to walk away empty handed you are often much more likely to get a good deal.  You are probably in the strongest negotiating position when you really don't care if the case settles or not.  However, it is rare in the litigation context that an initial "take it or leave it" approach results in a settlement.  Particularly if you are negotiating with an insurance company there will be an expectation that you engage in a negotiation process with multiple offers going back and forth.  Usually a case will not settle until both parties have the perception that they could do worse if they go to trial.  The parties need to sense the risk.

Still, as Brodsky demonstrates, the "take it or leave it" approach can be very effective under certain circumstances and is a very powerful negotiation technique with the right client and case.  Being a good poker player doesn't hurt either.

Guide for Choosing a Business Entity

As New York Small Business Law blog says, "Articles on choice of business entity are a dime a dozen."  But I agree this article concerning Choice of Entity from the worldwide law firm of O'Melveney & Myers is an excellent guide. 

The article contains the answers to many of the frequently asked questions concerning using a "C" corporation, an "S" corporation or an LLC/Partnership for business operations.   The article discusses the tax aspects of the various entities.  The tax treatment of your business should be a major factor in determining which business entity you choose.  I also recommend speaking with your accountant before you make a decision on which entity to use.

How to Hire an Iowa Business Attorney

The time to hire a business attorney is before you get into legal trouble.  It is much easier and more cost-effective to prevent problems rather than solve them.  Further, if you do get into legal trouble it will be much easier to deal with the issues if you already have a solid relationship with a business attorney.

So how do you hire a business attorney for your Iowa business?  I suggest you insist upon two main criteria:

1. The attorney must be experienced and competent with business law issues.  Since you are in business you probably should not hire the local personal injury, family law or other attorney that does not have experience with business law issues.  Choosing a lawyer that is not familar with business law may have serious consequences and may increase the costs because the lawyer may learn on your dime. By analogy, you don't want a plastic surgeon operating on your heart.

2.  Make sure you feel comfortable with the attorney.  Don't make a snap decision based upon hourly rates.  Do you trust the lawyer?  Did you get your call returned right away?  Is the attorney easy to talk with?  Does the attorney care about you and your business?  Does the relationship feel right?  There are many competent and experienced business attorneys in Iowa so make sure to trust your instincts.

Here are a couple of articles which may help you choose the right attorney for your business:

How to Hire an Attorney from Entrepreneur.com

Ten Questions to Ask Your Business Attorney from Allbusiness.com

Start-Up Business Resource: Business.gov

Business.gov is the "Official Link to the U.S Government".  This Web site is an excellent resource for the start-up business. 

The site has many helpful areas including:

1.  Business Resource Library - contains information on a variety of regulatory topics including taxes, managing and hiring employees and intellectual property;

2.  Government forms search - by agency, form number or name;

3.  State Compliance Resources - which might be particularly helpful if you are doing business in more than one state;

4.  Links to the Small Business Business Administration - includes links to planning, starting, managing and exiting a business.

Business Sale Agreements: Buyer Knows Seller's Representations are Inaccurate

I read this well-written blog post from Ken Adams of Adams Drafting regarding the implications of a buyer knowing, pre-closing, that a seller's representations are inaccurate in a business sale.  I recently wrote about the litigation traps of selling a business so I found this article intriguing.

Following the tips outlined in Ken's post may help protect against some of the post-closing demands from buyers in a business sale but it is still important for a seller to document the disclosure of adverse material facts.

Drafting Non-Compete Agreements in Iowa

In Iowa, non-compete agreements are enforceable under certain circumstances.  The best time to secure a non-compete is when you hire the employee although continued employment may be sufficient consideration to bind even current employees.  Iowa courts have developed a three-part test to determine whether a non-compete agreement is enforceable:

1.  Is it necessary for the protection of the employer's business?

Factors to consider:  Does the employee have a great deal of personal contact with customers?  Is the employee in a position to lure customers away?  Have you spent significant time and money training the employee?

2. Is the non-compete unreasonably restrictive of the employee's rights

Factors to consider:  Is the non-compete limited in time?  The most common time restrictions are 1-3 years.  Courts tend to favor shorter time restrictions.  (This will always depend on the cirmcumstances of the particular case).

Is the non-compete limited in geographic scope?  For a local business, a 50-mile limit may be reasonable while a regional business may use a scope spread out over several states.  It depends on the market area of the particular business.  Because of the Internet and other technologies, geographic limits are becoming a less effective way to control competition from former employees.  Businesses must carefully consider how to be reasonable and still control competition in the global marketplace.

3. Is the non-compete prejudical to the public interest

Factors to consider:  Does the particular non-compete harm the general public?  This part of the test has rarely been used to invalidate non-competes in Iowa.  For example, non-competes in Iowa have been upheld against doctors and dentists where you might expect that limiting access to health care could harm the general public.

Finally, Iowa has adopted a "partial enforcement" doctrine permitting a court to uphold a non-compete agreement to the extent it is reasonable and allowing the Court to modify terms if necessary.  For example, a court may reduce a time restriction from 3 years to 1 year if the judge finds that is appropriate.  Or, a judge could change a geographic restriction from the entire state of Iowa to a 100-mile radius of the business.  This is different from an all or nothing approach where a judge might declare the entire non-compete agreement invalid if just one of the terms is found unreasonable.  When litigating non-compete agreements in Iowa the parties must consider whether the agreement may be partially enforced.   

Iowa Microsoft Case Update

When you go to court you are putting your fate into the hands of twelve people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty. - Comedian Norm Crosby

The jury in the Iowa consumer class action case against Microsoft has been picked. (Of course, these jurors should be commended for their service and the joke above is not intended to reflect upon them in any way.  These jurors are making a sacrifice and I admire anyone who makes such a commitment to upholding our system of justice).  The jury consists of seven men and five women.  In a typical Iowa state civil court case you would normally only have eight jurors.  Several of the jurors have apparently purchased Microsoft products which makes them eligible to receive damages in the event the jury decides against Microsoft.  I seriously doubt that will be much of a factor.

Opening statements are expected to begin November 30th.  I'll continue to keep readers posted as the case moves forward.  It should be an intriguing but lengthy trial. (You gotta feel for those jurors).  It is expected that both Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer will testify live in the case. 

The Plaintiffs are asking for over $300 million in damages.  The Des Moines Register also reported that both sides have hired PR firms to handle the publicity in the case.  I will enjoy seeing how that plays out giving the number of blogs that will likely cover this trial. 

So tell me your opinion?  How do you feel about this case?

Just Say No to Legalese

I reviewed three commercial leases this past week so this quote from Will Rogers sums up my experience:

The minute you read something and you can't understand it, you can almost be sure that it was drawn up by a lawyer.  You see, every time a lawyer writes something, he is not writing for poserity, he is writing so that the endless others of his craft can make a living out of trying to figure out just what he said.

The Writing, Clear and Simple Blog has some excellent observations on clearer legal writing.  Let's all just say no to legalese in said contracts hereafter.

California Case Provides Immunity for the Online Content of Others

The Technology and Marketing Blog has an interesting analysis of the Barrett vs. Rosenthal case handed down by the California Supreme Court on November 20, 2006.  In its ruling, the court decided whether "distributors" of content have immunity under 47 USC 230 for Internet publications.

A major point in the analysis: 

No one is liable for other people's content online--period (except for claims not covered under the statute--IP, federal criminal law, ECPA).

The author, Eric Goldman, points out that "active involvement in the creation of a defamatory Internet posting would expose a defendant to liability as an original source."  But in the Rosenthal case the defendant forwarded content without modification.  Accordingly, (at least in California) Plaintiffs that claim they were defamed in Internet postings may only seek recovery from the original source of the statement.

The Rosenthal case appears to protect bloggers who link to articles or republish content without modification but another case in the District of Columbia threatens to go in a different direction.  In general though it is still a good idea for bloggers to check out the accuracy of posts before linking or republishing content.

Set Up Corporation or LLC Before Buying Franchise

Buying a franchise does not automatically provide you with limited liability.  The franchisor may be a corporation or LLC but that does not make your own franchise business a corporation or LLC.  You must still form your own corporation or LLC in order to obtain the benefits of limited liability.  Otherwise, you will have a sole proprietorship or partnership which could subject you to personal liability.

It is a good idea to sign the franchise agreement in the name of your corporation or LLC even if you must personally guarantee the obligations of the agreement.  It could actually help you in unrelated litigation down the road.  In a case I am familar with the owner of a franchise did not sign the franchise agreement in the name of the LLC he allegedly used for his franchise business.  The plaintiff in that case attempted to impose personal liability on the owner because he had not signed the franchise agreement in the name of his LLC.  Further, the LLC owner did not sign his agreement with the Plaintiff in the name of his LLC.  The defendant used only the franchise name which did not give any indication to the Plaintiff that it was dealing with anything but a sole proprietorship.  Ultimately the court ruled in favor of the Plaintiff and personal liability for the debt was imposed. 

The lesson is to start with the corporate formalities from the beginning.  Be sure to sign agreements in the name of the corporate entity.  Here are some checklists for those interested in forming a corporation or LLC for their franchise or other business.  If you have any questions please be sure to talk to an experienced business attorney.

Buying a Franchise: Questions to Ask Franchisors

In his monthly newsletter, Joe Cooney of Frannet points out the categories and questions you should ask franchisors to provide a starting point in your due diligence process.  Those categories and questions include:

1.  Competitive Advantage of Product or Service

How is your system better than others?  Who are your competitors?  How does your business match up?  Who are your suppliers?  What are the prices of your products?  Are your products priced fairly?  Are there any restrictions with regard to products and services?

2.  Time Tested, Standardized Franchise System

How long have you been franchising?  How many franchise units do you operate?  How many units have you closed in the last three years?  How many units have been transferred or sold in the last three years?  How many units do you plan to open over the next three years?  What is the initial investment and what do we get for that?  What are your fees?  What earnings claims do you make?  What improvements have you made to your system recently?

3.  Strong Franchisor Support

How do you support franchisees?  What is the initial training process?  What support do you provide after the franchise is up and running?  What will I hear from franchisees on this subject?

4.  Financial Strength and Management Experience

Describe in layman's terms the financial strength of the franchise system.  How much revenue comes from initial fees and how much from royalties?  Is the franchise publicly traded and how has it performed?

5.  Mutual Interest of Franchisor and Franchisee

How will franchisees describe their relationship with the franchisor?  Supportive?  Combative?  Have there been any lawsuits or abritration proceedings?  What was the issue and how did it end?

Remember this is only a start for the due diligence process.  You should be sure to interview as many franchisees as possible in order to better understand the franchisor and its system. 

Frannet is also offering free webinars on franchise opportunities in specific industries.  If you have any questions about the webinars you can email Joe Cooney at jcooney@frannet.com

Seller Beware! Litigation Traps of Selling a Business

Most people have heard of "buyer beware" but anyone selling their business would be wise to think "seller beware".  When someone decides to sell their business they naturally want to find a buyer as quickly as possible for the highest possible price.  But business owners and advisors should take care to avoid litigation traps in selling a business.

1.  Conduct due diligence on the buyer.  Is the buyer adequately financed?  Even if the buyer is able to obtain a loan will the buyer have sufficient operating capital to run the business?  Moreover, does the buyer have an aptitude for the business?  If not, the buyer is less likely to succeed and an unhappy buyer is more likely to file a lawsuit.

Check out the buyer's litigation history, judgments and credit history.  A buyer will almost always obtain tax returns from a seller but a seller should also consider obtaining financial information from the buyer.

2. Do not divulge trade secrets and confidential business information without a signed confidentiality agreement.  The theft of trade secrets is an increasingly litigated issue.  In the business sale context this often happens when negotiations break down and the potential buyer decides they can start their own business.  It is important for the confidentiality agreement to include the right to obtain an injunction, damages and attorneys fees in the event of a breach.

3.  Avoid signing ambiguous letters of intent.  Some letters of intent are binding and others are not.  Be sure to have counsel review any letter of intent to make sure it protects your interests.

4.  Do not make inaccurate representations and warranties.  Sellers often do not carefully consider the representations and warranties they make in the purchase agreement.  There are significant risks in making false or negligent representations and warranties.

5.  Failure to adequately document the disclosure of adverse material facts.  Often a seller will divulge to the buyer adverse material facts that impact the business.  After doing so the deal closes despite the bad news.  Imagine the frustration then when the buyer sues the seller for breach of warranties and representations, fraud and breach of contract claiming that the seller never told the buyer about the problems.  At a minimum, a seller should have the buyer acknowledge receipt of the adverse material facts during the due diligence phase.  By doing so the seller can protect against claims down the road that the buyer was never told about problems with the business.

6.  Do not draft your own purchase agreement or rely upon a business broker's form agreement.  In my experience the only person protected by a broker's form agreement is the broker.  The broker will often tell a seller that a lawyer will only slow up the process and add expense.  The broker has only one thing on their mind - the commission.  Make sure you talk with a lawyer experienced in business sale transactions when drafting the contract.  Sure, it does add some expense but it will likely pay off down the road.  A well-drafted contract can help you avoid litigation completely or it will provide better protection if and when litigation does occur. 

Source:  Thanks to Pennsylvania business lawyer Anthony Cerminaro for his post on the topic.

Business to Business Litigation on the Rise

North Carolina business litigation attorney, Thomas Kerner, has an excellent post about the rise in business to business contract litigation.  Kerner says this is happening for two main reasons.  First, many businesses do not use lawyers to draft their contracts.  Second, many businesses often rely on form contracts that are outdated.

Kerner provides some terrific advice:

Make sure your contracts and business practices are as up to date as possible; if your contracts with customers, vendors, suppliers, distributors and everyone else you do business with aren't up to date with the latest developments in business and contract law, you could be staring at one of these "bet the company cases".

He also provides a link to an interesting article on the huge rise in business to business litigation.

S Corporations Have Low Audit Risk

Here is an interesting tidbit presented by the California Estate and Business Law Blog.

According to Turbotax the S Corporation has the lowest risk of audit for the various business entities.  Those audit risk percentages are:

S corporations   .19%

Partnerships     .26%

C Corporations    .71%

Sole Proprietorships     2.13%

But if you play by the rules it really should not matter which business entity you use.

Update on December 1, 2006:  See this article from Inc. Magazine which I spotted on the New York Small Business Law blog (thanks Imke) concerning the rise in S corporation audits.  Again, play by the rules and it won't matter.

Law Blogs, Laptops and Burritos

Last week was a momentous week as Brett Trout and I concluded the first ever full-day CLE devoted to lawyer blogging in the country through LAWpportunities.  We were fortunate to have been joined by blogging experts Mike Sansone and Sandy Renshaw.  Mike delighted the crowd with his tutorial on RSS feeds.  Any lawyer not using RSS feeds in their law practice is missing out.  If you are a lawyer interested in harnessing the power of RSS feeds you may want to check out the Iowa State Bar Association eCommerce seminar on December 1st where I will be talking about how RSS feeds may gain you a client for life. 

Prior to their appearance at our blogging seminar, Mike and Sandy joined several other Iowa bloggers (Drew, Tim, Mike, Tom, Mitch, Doug and Brooke) in welcoming Starbucker to Iowa Blogging Central (aka Panera U in West Des Moines).  Now Sansone is probably the biggest Panera fan I know and Starbucker obviously has a certain affinity for a cup of latte now and then.  But fellas your favorites could use a little help.

First, Starbucks reported earlier this month that it had lost the personal data of 60,000 employees and contractors when two laptops turned up missing.  It is bad enough that the personal data included names, addresses and social security numbers but that is only part of the story.  The rest of story is that the laptops were missing from . . . a closet!  Who stores computers containing confidential information in a closet?  (Well, I guess Starbucks actually).  Anyway, after a two month investigation did not turn up the laptops Starbucks has offered the employees and contractors free credit protection to guard against identity theft.  Also, Starbucks already implemented a policy whereby confidential information such as social security numbers are not allowed on laptops and other mobile devices but these laptops unfortunately contained the information before the policy was in place.  No word on whether Starbucks has implemented a policy prohibiting the storage of laptops in closets.

Second, Panera had its own little legal blunder.  Panera had the exclusive right to sell sandwiches in a Massachusetts mall.  The owner of the mall then signed a lease with Qdoba Mexican Grill.  Panera sued to enforce the exclusivity portion of their lease.  The court ruled that a burrito is not a sandwich.  The decision came down to the difference between two slices of bread versus one tortilla.  The judge also concluded that a sandwich is not commonly understood to include burritos, tacos and quesadillas which are typically made of a single tortilla stuffed with a choice of meat, rice and beans.  (No wonder the guys at Pancheros looked at me a little funny when I ordered a sandwich with steak, rice, beans, cheese and salsa on tortilla.  I guess the judge was right).

Only in America!

 

Five Ways to Avoid Lawsuits Against Your Business

As evidenced by a recent study from Iowa Association of Business and Industry, Iowa companies are concerned about the legal climate in Iowa. 

Here are five ways to avoid lawsuits against your business:

1.  Use written agreements.  Unfortunately the day is over when you could rely on a handshake.  Make sure that your agreements are comprehensive.  The agreements should always set forth the rights and responsibilities of the parties in detail.  It is a good idea to have your written agreements drafted and/or reviewed by a business attorney.

2.  Have a comprehensive employee manual.  Employee lawsuits are on the rise and a major distraction for your business.  A written employee handbook affords you a better opportunity to avoid misunderstandings that can lead to litigation.  Disputes are are less likely to occur when your employees know the rules.  Keep in mind that a well-written employee handbook can help your business but a poorly written handbook can cause even more problems for your business.  Don't pull a template from the Internet without consulting an employment lawyer.

3.  Maintain your corporate or other limited liability structure.  Make sure to keep your personal guarantees to a minimum, stay current with corporate records, pay your applicable taxes and do not mix your personal assets with your business assets.

4.  Protect your intellectual property.  Consider obtaining trademarks, copyrights and patents as applicable.  Consult an intellectual property lawyer in order to protect yourself against infringers.  Likewise, avoid infringing someone else's intellectual property.  Before deciding on a business or product name you should check to see if the name is trademarked by someone else.  Similarly, be careful not to steal copyrighted materials for your own use.

5.  Consider alternative dispute resolutionMediation is often an efficient way to resolve business disputes.  Mediation is a process in which the parties to a dispute, with the assistance of a neutral third party (the mediator), identify disputed issues, develop options, consider alternatives and work to reach an agreement. There is a time to go to court but consider the costs of the litigation before making that decision.  Approach the decision of whether to litigate in a business-like-manner rather than emotionally.

Should You Ask About Citizenship on Employment Application?

Last week I attended the Iowa State Bar Association Employment Law Seminar.  One of the more interesting discussions involved whether an employer should ask an applicant whether he or she is a U.S. citizen or authorized to work in the U.S. on the employment application.  There was some lively debate on the issue. 

The speaker on immigration law, James Benzoni of Des Moines, advised that employers should not ask the question on the employment application.  He said asking the question prior to hiring opens the employer up to possible national origin discrimination claims and that the I-9 process takes care of determining whether the employee is eligible after hiring.  He asked, "Isn't that why we have the I-9 process?"

The Staff Selection blog has a list of questions not to ask in an interview or employment application.  The blog post (source: Business.gov) advises that it is acceptable to ask, "Will you be able to show proof of eligibility to work in the U.S. if hired?" 

But if I understand Benzoni's advice correctly he would argue why even take the chance with that question.  Isn't it presumed the applicant is able to show proof of eligibility?  Isn't that part of why the applicant is applying for the job - because they're eligible to work in the U.S.?

Benzoni makes a good point.  Before hiring, questions regarding whether someone is a U.S. citizen or eligible to work in the U.S. could open the employer to possible discrimination claims.  The I-9 process does flush out whether the employee is able to show proof of eligibility.

The question of citizenship and eligibility is frequently asked on employment applications so employers would be wise to review their applications and ask their employment lawyer for specific advice on the issue.

Iowa Consumer Case Against Microsoft Begins Tomorrow

The Iowa consumer class action case against Microsoft begins tomorrow, November 13, 2006.  It is anticipated it may take weeks to pick the jury and the trial itself could take several months.  The jurors will be expected to complete a 31-page survey before the questions even begin.  Surveys are often used by Plaintiffs' attorney, Roxanne Conlin, as a part of her jury selection process.  Having the survey though will help both sides.  The lawyers are able to learn a great deal more about prospective jurors and ultimately their biases.   

The jury pool for this case is substantially larger than your ordinary case.  You generally have about 24 prospective jurors in the jury pool of a typical civil case in Polk County, Iowa.  In this case, approximately 450 people will be a part of the jury pool.

The case involves involves allegations that Microsoft used anti-competitive practices to drive up the cost of its Windows operating system, as well as its Microsoft Office, Word and Excel programs.  Potential members of the class include any person, business or organization that bought those programs.  About $450 million is at stake. 

The plaintiffs were already dealt a significant blow in pre-trial motions when Judge Scott Rosenberg ruled the plaintiffs could not proceed with a "loss of innovation" theory for damages.

If you are interested in learning more about the issues in the case you may want to check out Des Moines patent lawyer Brett Trout's podcast interview with David Lawrence.

Stay in touch for more as the trial proceeds.

Mavericks at Work

I recently enjoyed the book Mavericks at Work, Why the Most Original Minds in Business Win.  The authors are William C. Taylor and Polly LaBarre.

According to the book the first question to ask yourself is:  Do you have a distinctive and disruptive sense of purpose that sets you apart from your rivals?

An example is Cranium which had a much higher purpose than just selling their games.  Instead, they were rethinking how parents could relate to their kids and how families could relate to one another.

My sense of purpose with this blog is that I can educate and provide information to clients and business people in such a way that helps them identify legal issues and make more informed choices about what legal services they need.   

So ask yourself, what is your higher purpose?

Tags:

Managing Small Business Risks

New York Small Business lawyer Imke Ratschko presents a helpful e-book on her blog "Small Business Guide to Risk Management - A complete guide for business decision-makers" published by the Association of Small Business Development Centers.

This easy to read guide discusses the many risks that businesses face and provides checklists to assess those risks and mitigate them to the extent possible.

In particular, employee related lawsuits are a major concern of many businesses.  The guide contains an excellent overview of the issues related to human resources.  From the human resource section:

At a minimum, employers should ensure that they are in strict compliance with all applicable federal and state labor regulations.  A next step would be to institute proactive management policies and practices to educate managers and employees about their respective rights and responsibilities.  Employee lawsuits are often a symptom not only of perceived transgressions, but also of low employee morale brought on by ineffective or indifferent management attitudes.

Another insightful section involves intellectual property including patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets. 

I encourage you to check it out.

Think Twice Before Deleting Electronic Records

A $1.888 million dollar judgment in favor of a Delaware bankruptcy trustee stresses the importance of careful consideration before deleting electronic records from your company's computer system.  In the case of In re Quintus Corp., 2006 WL 3072982 (Bankr.D.Del.Oct. 27, 2006), the Bankruptcy Court of the Delaware District imposed a penalty of summary judgment against a party the Court found intentionally deleted documents, including electronic records, that would have been harmful to the party's position in the case.

Electronic Discovery Law Blog has a complete summary of the case and a link to the opinion.

If you are interested in learning more about electronic records retention and discovery issues you may also want to check out the Fios white pages and articles on electronic discovery.  Legal consultant Dennis Kennedy also has an excellent electronic discovery resources page

As pointed out in an earlier post, the new federal electronic discovery rules become effective December 1, 2006.   Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, 33, 34, 37, and 45 are being amended to take into account the importance of electronic records in the discovery process.

   

Nigut and Trout Spreading the Gospel of Lawyer Blogs

Rush Nigut and Des Moines patent attorney Brett Trout are featured in an article this week in the Des Moines Business Record for their upcoming YBlawg seminar.  According to LexBlog's Kevin O'Keefe, the seminar is believed to be the first full-day CLE devoted to lawyer blogging in the country

The location of the seminar is the Hilton Garden Inn in Johnston on November 10, 2006.  The seminar begins at 8:15 a.m. and is pre-approved for 7.0 hours of CLE including 1.0 hours of ethics.

Click here for our easy online registration and an outline of the seminar.  Just mention that you saw the article in the Des Moines Business Record and you can attend for the early bird rate of $249.00. 

Start-Up Business Resource: Iowa Secretary of State

Perhaps often overlooked, the Iowa Secretary of State Web site is an excellent resource for the Iowa start-up entrepreneur.  In the Iowa business services section of the site a business person can find information about a wide variety of topics including:

1.  A guide to the most commonly formed business organization options.  The guide has information on sole proprietorships, general partnerships, limited partnerships, limited liability partnerships, for profit corporations, nonprofit corporations, professional corporations and limited liability companies.

2.  A frequently asked questions section including information about domestic and foreign corporations in Iowa, registered agents and office, trademarks and service marks, trade names, and whether you should reserve a business name before forming your Iowa corporation.

3.  A section on the most common reasons documents are rejected by the office.

4.  A section on the tax aspects of an Iowa business which links to the Iowa Department of Revenue.

5.  A link to the Iowa business license information center.

And of course the disclaimer:  The information provided on the Iowa Secretary of State's site is intended to give you a basic understanding of some of the various types of entity formation you may choose for your business or your organization. This information is not complete and is not a substitute for the advice of an Iowa business lawyer or any other professional advisor.

The information on the site was provided with the assistance of respected Drake University Law School Professor Matthew Dore

Judge's Throws Out Loss of Innovation Theory in Microsoft Case

In pre-trial rulings, Polk County District Court Judge Scott Rosenberg has thrown out the "loss of innovation" damage claim alleged against Microsoft .  Plaintiffs' counsel, Roxanne Conlin, had alleged that Microsoft's market dominance prevented other software companies from developing products that competed with Microsoft's web browser Internet Explorer and other Microsoft products.

The Judge sided with the plaintiffs' on seven other pre-trial motions but the ruling on the loss of innovation theory appears to be a significant blow to the plaintiffs' case.

Thanks to Des Moines Patent Attorney Brett Trout for the heads up.

See also a Des Moines Register article on the ruling. 

The Race for Iowa Governor: Culver and Nussle

Next Tuesday we will elect a new Governor in Iowa.  Will it be Chet Culver or Jim Nussle?

Be sure to check out both sites and examine their positions on Iowa business.  Culver's site includes a 10 point plan to promote Iowa small business, entrepreneurs and access to capital.  Nussle's site includes a plan to create jobs and grow Iowa's economy

So examine the issues and make sure to vote next Tuesday, November 7th.