It is important to consider the local zoning ordinances when choosing a business location.  It may not be a significant problem for businesses with office locations but businesses such as car dealerships (especially used), real estate rental companies, auto body shops and manufacturing facilities could run into problems if you are not familar with local zoning ordinances.  A zoning problem can shut your business down very quickly.

Check out Des Moines Municipal Code Chapter 134 and the city of Des Moines Web site if you have questions about local zoning ordinances in Des Moines.

A big tip of the cap to Des Moines patent lawyer Brett Trout.  Brett’s blog, Blawg IT, has been named as a finalist for the Weblogs 2006 Law Blog of the Year.  Brett’s blog covers patent, trademark, copyright and information technology issues in an informative and entertaining way.  The Weblogs Award is the world’s largest blog competition.  Congratulations Brett!

The voting begins for the best law blog begins December 7, 2006 so make sure to cast your vote.

Other law blog finalists include:

How Appealing
Becker-Posner
Blawg IT
Balkinization
Concurring Opinions
Consumer Law & Policy Blog
The Grotian Moment: Saddam Hussein Trial Blog.
IMPACT
The Volokh Conspiracy
JURIST – Paper Chase

If you have a chance be sure to check them out.  There are some excellent legal blogs on this list.

The new federal electronic discovery rules became effective December 1, 2006.  (See this earlier article for a more detailed description of the rules and the amendments.)  Consulting companies appear to be hitting this hot and heavy as several of my clients have received marketing materials offering to assist with their electronic discovery needs.  Many clients, especially those who have not been involved in federal litigation, have questions about electronic discovery and the impact of the new rules on their businesses.

In reality, electronic discovery of documents has been around for several years.  The new rules have placed more emphasis on electronic discovery.  In federal court litigation, the parties will now be required to address electronic discovery right up front in any lawsuit.  In the past there were times where courts might have had questions about what was discoverable and what constituted a document for production purposes.  Now it is unquestionable that all kinds of electronically stored information are discoverable including emails, spreadsheets, powerpoints, documents, etc.  The parties will need to cooperate in order to exchange electronically stored information in a usable format.  The organization of such information will take on a greater importance under the new federal rules.

A critical component of the rules is that if you anticipate ligation could occur or if litigation has already occurred you have a duty to preserve electronically stored information.  This will help you avoid problems such the case described in this article.

This also brings to the forefront the need for a document and email retention policy.  Many clients ask how long they need to keep certain documents.  Unfortunately there is no magic formula but the answer varies with the industry and practices of each client and depends on the type of documents.  The new rules do not require a document retention policy but recent cases involving the destruction of documents place a strong emphasis on having such a policy.

I recently listened to a great podcast by Coast to Coast on the new federal electronic discovery rules.  Just scroll down to the November 2, 2006 podcast.  Lawyers J. Craig Williams and Robert Ambrogi have an informative show with Michele C.S. Lange of Kroll on Track and Dennis Kennedy as guests.  Best of all it’s free.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Roxanne Conlin has decided not to call Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer in her case-in-chief, contrary to her earlier strategy.  Conlin reconsidered her position after Judge Rosenberg ruled that Microsoft could question Gates and Ballmer directly after Conlin rather than waiting until Microsoft presented its side of the case.  Instead, Conlin will now show the entire videotaped deposition of Gates taken during the federal antitrust trial in the late 1990s.

It could be a good move by Conlin but I think it is a bit unusual for her to be changing course after her initial announcement.  Sounds like a little indecision on her part.  It’s possible the move hurts Microsoft a little bit because I am sure the company’s lawyers would have liked to question Gates right after Conlin’s examination in order to rehabiliate him.  The video does not show Microsoft’s CEO in the best light but it was taken several years ago.  Will jurors think Conlin has something to hide by not calling him directly?

At this point, opening statements continue on.  Conlin’s opening is expected to last at least a few more days.

Franchise Law Blog reported that a group of Quiznos franchisees have filed a class action against the Denver based sandwich chain in Wisconsin.  The lawsuit contends that the franchisor forces franchisees to buy food and supplies from Quiznos and affiliates at inflated prices while setting retail prices so low the franchisees cannot profit.  The lawsuit also alleges that the franchise omits or misrepresents key facts about its business operations when selling the franchise. 

Quiznos denies the allegations and intends to vigorously defend the lawsuit.

Regardless of the outcome the lawsuit it provides an important lesson for prospective franchisees who are reviewing a franchise agreement.  Many franchise agreements contain restrictions on the products and suppliers the franchisee may use.  While this may seem reasonable in the beginning, (after all your buying a proven system, right?) many franchisees discover later they can get cheaper products and find better suppliers than the franchisor’s system.  After some time franchisees may begin to question why he or she is paying for higher priced products along with royalties which eat into profits even more.  When this happens franchisees tend to get upset and file lawsuits like the one against Quiznos. 

If the franchisee agreement you are considering contains restrictions on products and suppliers be sure to consider those provisions very carefully.  Be prepared to ask the tough questions of the franchisor when it comes to products and suppliers.  Also, don’t take for granted just because you are going with a top selling franchisor that you are getting the most for your money.  Above all, make sure to talk with as many current franchisees as possible and conduct your due diligence.

A recent study by professor James Chrisman of Mississippi State University shows that Iowa Small Business Development Center (SBDC) clients grow 24% faster than Iowa businesses that have no assistance from the SBDC.

The independent study also shows that the SBDC has a significant impact on Iowa’s tax revenues, job creation and retention, and capital acquisition and sales growth.  Chrisman’s research indicates tax payers in Iowa are receiving a 4 to 1 return from tax dollars spent on the centers.

If you are starting a business in Iowa you should at least check out what the Small Business Development Centers have to offer.  The centers serve all 99 counties from 13 different locations around the state.

The Iowa consumer class action case against Microsoft has officially begun.  Roxanne Conlin began her opening statements Friday.  Her case will include nine separate stories about how Microsoft has undercut competitors and acted illegally.  She will focus not only on IBM and Linux but also lesser known companies such as Go Computers and Acer Co.  Conlin’s opening will actually take several days.

Microsoft lawyer, Rich Wallis, says the anticompetitive activites Conlin complains about are all in the past.  He says the company has not violated the law since it agreed to a consent decree with the federal government in 1999.

Check out this Des Moines Register story written by David Elbert for the details.

I am speaking today at the Iowa State Bar Association eCommerce Seminar on the use of RSS feeds in today’s law practice.

The acronym RSS stands for a couple of things:  Really Simple Syndication or Rich Site Summary.  RSS is a format for delivering regularly changing Web content. (See www.whatisrss.com).  Many news-related sites, blogs and other online publishers syndicate their content to whoever wants it.  See the orange icon on the right side of this blog?  That is an RSS feed. (Please feel free to subscribe to mine).

Why Should You Care?  RSS solves a problem for people who regularly use the Web.  It allows you to stay informed by receiving summaries from the latest sites you are interested in.  You SAVE TIME because it is no longer necessary to visit each site individually.  You ensure your PRIVACY and keep your email UNCLUTTERED because you are no required to sign up for an email newsletter.

It also gives you a couple of key advantages as a lawyer.  First, it gives you INSTANT KNOWLEDGE.  Now you are able to know when someone has said something good or bad about your law firm, your competitors, your clients and your industry.  But here is the best part (this is where you may earn a client for life).  You have the perfect opportunity to show that you CARE.  If something appears on the Web about your client or if there is something that interests or impacts them you have the opportunity to forward it to them in a record amount of time.  It is conceivable that you may know your client has been sued before the client knows.  Do you think that would enable you to keep a client for life?

For more on RSS take a look at Dennis Kennedy’s blog post and an excellent article on the subject written by Kennedy and Tom Mighell.

This post by Mike Sansone of Converstations makes the case for RSS feeds so effectively.

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 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.