Would Your Contract Hold Up in Court? Indemnification Clauses and Public Policy.
If you’re in business, you know that contracts are a must to protect yourself. But don’t make the mistake of assuming that simply having a contract is enough. If it’s worded incorrectly, it can cost you.
In previous blogs we’ve discussed what can happen when covenants not to compete and nondisclosure agreements overreach or violate public policy – they become unenforceable.
The same is true with other common clauses in business contracts. Today we’re looking at the indemnification clause, which was the subject in a recent case before the South Carolina Court of Appeals. The Court determined that the clause in question was worded in such a way as to violate state public policy and was therefore unenforceable.
Let’s look at what indemnification is first, then the case, and finally, what you as a business owner can do so you don’t find yourself in the same situation.
What is Indemnification?
In an indemnification clause, the indemnifying party (the indemnifier) agrees to – in standard contract language – “indemnify, hold harmless, and defend” the indemnified party (the indemnitee) against lawsuits and losses resulting from the actions or negligence of the indemnifying party.
In practice, indemnification serves to shift the costs of defending lawsuits and paying resulting damages, if any, from one party (the indemnitee) to the other (the indemnifier). It may also shift the actual defense litigation as well.
For example, say a construction company hires a subcontractor to do some work on a house. The subcontractor indemnifies the construction company against damages arising from lawsuits due to its (the subcontractor’s) work. Let’s say the subcontractor does a shoddy job and the homeowner later sues the construction company for damages. Because it was indemnified, the construction company can expect the subcontractor to cover the fees it spends defending itself and the damages it pays to settle the claim.
A Real-Life Example
This was the general situation in the case at hand, D.R. Horton v. Builders FirstSource v. Jamie Arreguin.
The builder D.R. Horton, Inc. (Horton) entered into a contract with Builders FirstSource (BFS) for BFS to do some construction work on a home. Several years after the work was completed, Horton was sued by Patricia Clark for damages related to multiple alleged construction defects in the home. Horton was ordered to pay Clark $150,000 in general damages after arbitration.
Horton then sought to recover those damages and legal fees from BFS under their contract’s indemnification clause. The case went to a circuit court, which sided with BFS. It then went to the South Carolina Court of Appeals, which affirmed the lower court’s decision.
(For more details about this case, read the PDF of the court’s opinion here.)
What happened? BFS and Horton had an indemnification clause in their contract; why was Horton not able to recover under it?
The Indemnification Clause Violated Public Policy
The main reason the Court decided in BFS’s favor was that the contract’s indemnification clause was written in such a way as to violate South Carolina public policy.
The Court of Appeals found that it was allowable under state statute for Horton and BFS to agree that BFS would indemnify Horton for damages caused by BFS. However, the Court also found that it was not allowable for Horton to have BFS indemnify Horton for damages caused by Horton, which is how the clause was worded. That violated Section 32-2-10 of the South Carolina code and went against public policy, making it illegal and therefore unenforceable.
Here is the relevant section of the Code, abridged for clarity:
“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a promise or agreement in connection with the […] construction […] of a building […] purporting to indemnify the promisee […] against liability for damages […] proximately caused by or resulting from the sole negligence of the promisee […] is against public policy and unenforceable.”
In addition, the circuit court and Court of Appeals found that Horton failed to provide BFS written notice of the Clark matter, as per their contract, which acted as a waiver of Horton’s right to indemnification. Also, Horton and Clark requested that the arbitration award be general, which means there was no way to know what part, if any, of the $150,000 award was related to construction work completed by BFS.
What This Means for You
Time and again, businesses get in trouble when they try to get more than they fairly and lawfully deserve. Here, Horton wanted BFS to pay damages for what may have been Horton’s own negligence, which is not reasonably fair, and is also not legal. In the end, Horton got nothing.
As a business owner, here’s what you can do to avoid a similar situation:
- Be very intentional about the wording in the contracts you create. While you want to protect your company’s interests, if you go overboard, you could end up with a clause or contract that’s unenforceable.
- Be just as careful about the contracts you sign. Do you understand what every clause means, and is it fair?
- Work closely with an attorney who understands contract law. Have your attorney draft new contracts or review existing contracts and discuss them with you to ensure they’re worded correctly and align with your business interests.
Get Help with Your Contracts From the Business Attorneys at Gem McDowell Law Group
Gem McDowell is a problem solver and a business attorney with over 25 years of experience. He can help you with your legal needs including reviewing and drafting contracts. Call them at Gem McDowell Law Group in Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina to discuss your business matter at (843) 284-1021 today.
The Statute of Elizabeth: What You Need to Know About Transferring Assets
What if you owed someone a lot of money, but you didn’t want to pay them back? You might try to put your assets somewhere they couldn’t be touched; for example, you might gift them to a person you trust, or transfer them to an LLC.
Fortunately for your creditor, and unfortunately for you, you won’t get away with this scheme if your intention is to avoid paying your debts.
Moving assets in the way described above is referred to as “fraudulent conveyance,” after the Fraudulent Conveyances Act of 1571, aka the Statute of 13 Elizabeth.
The Statute of Elizabeth
The Fraudulent Conveyances Act, as it’s properly known, was an English act of 16th Century Parliament that many U.S. states adopted early on. Most states have since adopted the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyances Act (UFCA) or, more commonly, the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA).
The purpose of the Statute of Elizabeth is to provide a way for creditors to “undo” asset transfers of their debtors when the transfers were done so fraudulently. According to South Carolina Code, “every gift, grant alienation, bargain, transfer, and conveyance of lands… for any intent or purpose to delay, hinder, or defraud creditors and others of their just and lawful actions, suits, debts, accounts, damages, penalties, and forfeitures must be deemed and taken… to be clearly and utterly void…”
How does the court know whether the transfer was, indeed, done fraudulently? If the transferor denies fraud (as you’d expect), the court can look for these “badges of fraud”:
- Insolvency or indebtedness of transferor
- A lack of consideration for the conveyance
- A relationship between the transferor and transferee
- Pending litigation or threat of litigation
- Secrecy or concealment
- Departure from usual method of business
- Transfer of debtor’s entire estate
- Reservation of benefit to the transferor
- Retention by the debtor of possession of the property
The court will look for a number of badges of fraud; one alone does not create a presumption of fraud.
If the court does find that the conveyance was fraudulent, it can be “undone,” giving the creditor recourse for collecting on its debt.
A recent South Carolina case on the Statute of Elizabeth
The South Carolina Court of Appeals heard a case on this very subject and decided in the case in February. Here’s what happened.
Kenneth Clifton borrowed $3.873 million from First Citizens Bank
Kenneth Clifton was a successful real estate developer who frequently bought land as investment properties and transferred them to LLCs. He purchased one property with Linda Whiteman in 1995, a piece of land in Laurens County, SC of approximately 370 acres, which they said was for retirement.
Clifton also regularly borrowed money to finance his purchases. He took out three loans from First Citizens Bank to finance three separate investments, totaling an initial loan amount of $3.873 million, and renewed them several times.
Around the time that the housing bubble burst, Clifton requested extensions on the loans, which the bank granted after he provided a personal financial statement demonstrating his ability to pay them back. His personal financial statement put the value of the assets he held at around $50 million, including a 50% stake in the Laurens County property valued at $1.57 million.
Clifton transferred away his interest as the bank came for its money
Before receiving an extension on the third loan, Clifton didn’t tell the bank that both he and Whiteman transferred their interests in the Laurens County property to Park at Durbin Creek (PDC), an LLC that Clifton had an interest in.
When the bank asked Clifton to come current with interest payments and provide more collateral before extending the loans again, he didn’t, and the bank began foreclosing proceedings, getting a deficiency judgment of $745,317.86 plus interest.
Meanwhile, Clifton disassociated himself from PDC and transferred his membership in it to Streamline, a company that did not yet exist and was comprised of his two daughters and ex-wife.
When the bank tried to collect on the judgment, it couldn’t, as all the assets listed in Clifton’s personal financial statement had been foreclosed on, transferred away to cover other debts, or otherwise disposed of. The bank filed suit against Clifton, citing the Statute of Elizabeth.
Fraudulent or not?
After a one-day, nonjury trial, the Circuit Court issued an order to set aside the conveyance of the Laurens County property to PDC; the conveyance of his 50% interest in the property was null and void, pursuant to Statute of Elizabeth. (The Court found many other issues with the transfer of interests to Streamline, as well.)
Clifton denied having transferred the land fraudulently, but the Court found that sufficient badges of fraud existed – six out of the nine listed above, to be exact.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the Circuit Court’s findings.
Asset protection the right way
Let’s look again at the badges of fraud:
- *Insolvency or indebtedness of transferor
- A lack of consideration for the conveyance
- A relationship between the transferor and transferee
- *Pending litigation or threat of litigation
- Secrecy or concealment
- Departure from usual method of business
- Transfer of debtor’s entire estate
- Reservation of benefit to the transferor
- Retention by the debtor of possession of the property
The two marked with an * are key. If someone knows they owe money they must pay back soon but can’t, or even if they don’t owe any money but could reasonably expect a lawsuit coming their way, then transferring away assets can look suspicious.
However, asset protection is important, and there are ways to do it correctly. This is when it’s vital to talk to an attorney with experience in estate planning. Gem McDowell of the Law Offices of Gem McDowell is a corporate, tax, and estate planning lawyer with 25 years of experience helping people grow and protect their assets. Call him at their Mount Pleasant office at (843) 284-1021 or by filling out this contact form online.
When Covenants Not to Compete and NDAs Reach Too Far
South Carolina courts are clear in their general dislike of covenants not to compete and any provisions that restrict an individual’s ability to work. They are also clear in their tendency to rule in favor of the employee rather than the employer in related cases. This was the issue at hand in a recent case decided by the South Carolina Court of Appeals.
Covenants not to compete and non-disclosure agreements (NDA) were covered on this blog previously, because it’s so important for employers to be extremely careful in their wording on non-compete and non-disclosure agreements. If they try to restrict their employees’ actions too much, an employer may discover their agreement has reached too far and is invalid.
Fay vs. Total Quality Logistics
That’s essentially what happened in the case at hand, Fay vs. Total Quality Logistics. TQL, an Ohio-based transportation and logistics company, hired Joshua Fay in late 2012. As required by the company, Fay signed TQL’s Non-Compete, Confidentiality, and Non-Solicitation Agreement before commencing work. The Agreement was signed in Ohio and was to be enforced under Ohio law.
The following summer, Fay was fired. He then founded JF Progressions, LLC, in Mount Pleasant, SC, providing logistics services to another company. TQL found out and notified Fay that TQL intended to pursue legal action if he didn’t stop what he was doing. Fay then filed suit against TQL to seek a declaratory judgment that the Agreement he had signed was invalid and not enforceable. He argued that the Court must invalidate the Agreement if it is contrary to SC public policy, even if Ohio law applied to the interpretation of the Agreement.
The case made it to the South Carolina Court of Appeals which sided with Fay and found that, though it was to be enforced under Ohio law, the Agreement offended South Carolina public policy and was therefore not enforceable. The Court of Appeals found that the lower court (the Circuit Court) erred when it ruled against Fay, stating that the Agreement was enforceable under Ohio law and did not offend SC public policy.
When non-compete and non-disclosure agreements are too broad
To understand why the South Carolina Court of Appeals ruled as it did, it’s important to understand the basics of non-compete agreements. Two important clauses in a non-compete agreement are about time and geography; agreements place limits on the length of time and the geographical area in which an employee or former employee can work. An enforceable agreement strikes a balance between protecting the employer’s interests and giving the employee or former employee the freedom to earn a living in their profession.
South Carolina has determined that these limits must be “reasonable.” In the Agreement Fay signed, the limits were not reasonable under South Carolina’s standards. The non-disclosure agreement was worded so as to effectively be a non-compete agreement, which was to be in effect “at all times.” Under the Agreement, Fay was restricted from working with “Competing Businesses,” which was defined as “any person, firm, corporation, or entity that is engaged in the Business anywhere in the Continental United States.” If TQL’s Agreement were enforced, Fay would not be able to work in the field of transportation and logistics in the Continental U.S. “for an indefinite time, if not forever,” in the Court of Appeal’s wording. South Carolina determined that these restrictions were too broad and violated the state’s public policy, as they restrict an individual’s right to exercise their trade.
The Court of Appeal’s decision cited the Stonhard case, quoting “The agreement fails to limit the covenant to a particular geographical area. To add and enforce such a term requires this [c]ourt to bind these parties to a term that does not reflect the parties’ original intention. Therefore, we hold that the covenant, despite any reformation, is void and unenforceable as a matter of public policy.”</P
In addition, the Court of Appeal’s decisions reaffirmed the fact that South Carolina does not follow the “blue pencil” rule. In non-compete cases, this rule allows courts the discretion to invalidate certain portions of an agreement while maintaining others and to create terms the court believes the parties should have agreed on in the first place.
(It’s important to note that this discussion is about the March 2017 decision of the South Carolina Court of Appeals. It’s possible that the South Carolina Supreme Court may take up this issue at a future date, at which point this decision could be reversed or affirmed.)
Lesson for employers on covenants not to compete and NDAs
The lesson here for employers is to be extremely careful in the wording on covenants not to compete, NDAs, and other contracts that have any limiting effect on your employees’ current or future ability to work. As we can see from this case, strict wording of an NDA can effectively be interpreted as a non-compete agreement, even if that wasn’t the original intention.
Employers also need to be cognizant of these issues with regards to different states’ laws. Even if your state’s courts find your contracts “reasonable,” another state’s courts may not, depending on the state’s public policy. The internet cannot provide reliable guidance on this topic, which is why it’s important to discuss it with an attorney who’s well versed in this topic.
For guidance on how to craft your company’s covenants not to compete and NDAs, or for advice on one you’ve already signed, contact Mt. Pleasant business attorney Gem McDowell. He can be reached at Gem McDowell Law Group in Mount Pleasant at (843) 284-1021 or by filling out this contact form online. Contact them today.
Why You Need to Read the Fine Print: A Cautionary Tale
You know you should read “the fine print” of every contract and agreement you sign, but do you? We sometimes assume that there’s nothing truly important happening in the fine print, the section of a contract that’s characterized by small type and is often full of mind-numbing legalese , and so we don’t read it. We tend to trust that the person who wrote the contract is treating us fairly.
But that’s a mistake. Here’s a quick story that shows why you should always read the fine print.
What Was Buried in the Fine Print
This happened several years ago. Joe owned a piece of property that ran alongside a major road. Sam owned a billboard company and approached Joe about putting a billboard on the property. Sam would pay to construct it and would secure the advertisers; Joe didn’t have to do anything except let Sam put up the billboard and then collect a small amount of rent each month.
This arrangement worked perfectly for both parties – until Joe sold the property.
Joe sold the property to Harry, which included in it the lease for the billboard. What Harry and Joe didn’t realize was that the lease contained the following provision: Sam had the right of first refusal for any sale of the property by Joe. That is, Joe should have approached Sam first about the sale of the property rather than immediately selling it to Harry.
Sam seized the opportunity to demand that someone buy his right of first refusal for an astronomical fee. He sued both Joe and Harry for the money. He didn’t care who paid it, as long as he got paid.
Eventually the matter was settled out of court. Joe and Harry ended up paying a large amount of money to Sam. And Sam made a tidy sum for doing absolutely nothing.
How the Story Should Have Gone Instead
Here’s what should have happened to avoid this troubling situation:
Joe should have never signed the lease with the right of first refusal. He should have had an experienced commercial real estate attorney review the lease for him, or at the very least he should have read every word of it before signing.
Then Harry should have never bought the property with the billboard lease agreement as-is. He should have had an experienced commercial real estate attorney review the contracts for him, or at the very least he should have read every word of them before signing.
The solution is the same both times: read the fine print!
What You Can Do To Prevent Unwelcome Surprises
First of all, don’t assume that the contract you’re about to sign is written in a way that treats you fairly. People can be sneaky, and when it comes to contracts, you’ve got to look out for your own interests.
Then do what Joe and Harry should have done – read the fine print. If the print is literally too small for you to read, request that the contract be reprinted in a more legible font size and refuse to sign it until you are able to read every word. Once you’re able to read it, make sure you understand what it actually means, and what the consequences could be.
Even better than reading it yourself is having a lawyer review it for you.
If you need an experienced commercial real estate attorney to review contracts or give advice on a purchase or sale, contact Gem McDowell of Gem McDowell Law Group. He can help. Send us a message today at our Mount Pleasant office or call (843) 284-1021.
How South Carolina Courts View Covenants Not to Compete
On the surface, covenants not to compete look simple. One party agrees not to compete against another party – either by working for a competing company, or by starting their own competing company – for a specified amount of time and within a specified location. But as simple as they seem, covenants not to compete aren’t so straightforward.
When two parties end up disagreeing over a covenant not to compete, the matter sometimes ends up in the South Carolina Court of Appeals. That happened recently, in a matter called Palmetto Mortuary Transport, Inc. v. Knight Systems, Inc., as recorded in the May 4, 2016 Advance Sheets (pdf). This case shows how the courts of South Carolina view and enforce covenants not to compete, and why, as a business owner, it’s important to do everything you can to draw up covenants not to compete that are enforceable.
The Background: Seller’s Remorse
In 2007, Seller sold its mortuary transportation business to Buyer. Among other things, the two parties agreed that 1) Seller would not provide mortuary transportation services within 150 miles of the business for a period of ten years after the sale, and 2) Buyer would buy certain types of body bags exclusively from Seller (at discounted prices) for ten years.
The terms of the sale worked well for several years, but then two things happened.
First, in 2011, Richland County sent out an RFP (request for proposal) for mortuary services. As part of the sale, Buyer had bought an existing contract for mortuary transportation services with Richland County. The covenant not to compete would bar Seller from providing mortuary services to Richland County for 10 years from the date of sale, because it was located within the agreed upon 150-mile radius. However, Seller was interested in submitting an RFP.
Second, Seller accused Buyer of breaking their agreement by purchasing body bags from someone other than Seller. It was found that Buyer had purchased over $45,000’s worth of body bags from Seller since 2007, but had also purchased $478.50’s worth of body bags from a third party. Because Buyer was in breach of contract, Seller said, Seller was no longer bound by the rules of the covenant not to compete.
Seller ended up winning the contract with Richland County. Buyer wasn’t happy.
The case was tried in late 2013, and the judge (actually a court-appointed special referee) found in favor of Buyer. Seller appealed and the decision by the South Carolina Court of Appeals is recorded in the May 4th Advance Sheets.
The Court of Appeals’ Verdict: Throw out the Baby With the Bathwater
The Court of Appeals did not agree with the lower court.
The lower court held that the terms of the covenant not to compete were “reasonably limited” in time and geographic scope. The Court of Appeals disagreed, stating, “In our view, the 150-mile restriction was overly broad and did not protect the rights and interests of [Buyer] in a reasonable manner.”
The Court also wrote that “In South Carolina, our courts will generally uphold and enforce a covenant not to compete arising out of the sale of a business if it is (1) reasonably limited as to time and territory, (2) supported by valuable consideration, and (3) not detrimental to the public interest.”
So for a covenant not to compete to be enforceable in South Carolina, it must meet all three requirements. If it fails one of the requirements, the entire agreement becomes void. Some other states allow courts to “blue pencil,” which means a court can say something like “150 miles is too much, but 50 miles is acceptable, so the rest of the agreement remains intact except for this part.” Not South Carolina. It throws the baby out with the bathwater.
Because the covenant not to compete in question failed to satisfy requirement #1, the entire covenant is not enforceable.
What it means for the parties: Seller is free to provide mortuary services in South Carolina without the restrictions originally laid out in the terms of the sale. Buyer lost a valuable contract as well as a competitive advantage because the covenant not to compete wasn’t enforceable. What Buyer thought was a smart move – restricting business activities of Seller in the manner it did – didn’t end up working out.
Why 150 Miles Wasn’t “Reasonable”
The United States is a large country. From Washington, D.C. to San Francisco, it’s over 2,400 miles. So restricting a business within a 150-mile radius doesn’t seem like a large area. How could that be “unreasonable”?
But consider the State of South Carolina. If you buy a business in Columbia, is it reasonable to expect the seller to abstain from business within a 150-mile radius? Columbia to Hilton Head is 125 miles as the crow flies. Columbia to Myrtle Beach is also 125 miles. And it’s just shy of 100 miles to Greenville. The seller would effectively be barred from conducting business in the entire state.
Also consider that the State of South Carolina is just over 30,000 square miles. The area in a circle with a 150-mile radius (πrr) is over 70,000 square miles – more than twice the area of the State of South Carolina.
150 miles doesn’t seem quite so reasonable now.
How to Determine “Reasonable” Geographic Restriction
It would be helpful to business owners if the courts would give a firm number that’s reasonable. But it doesn’t work that way. Among other things, the nature of the individual business determines what’s reasonable.
One way to think of it is how far a customer would travel to patronize a business. Would a customer drive 20 miles to go to a convenience store? Unlikely. That’s like driving all the way from Isle of Palms to Avondale in West Ashley. The vast majority of people are not going to drive that far for a soda and a lottery ticket. So in this example, even a 20-mile radius would be too large.
Or think of it from the salesperson’s point of view. Could a company that installs pools expect to serve customers in both Summerville and Folly Beach (a distance of 35 miles)? Possibly, yes. In this example, a 20-mile radius might be perfectly reasonable.
What You Should Do
Before drawing up or signing any covenant not to compete in South Carolina, take time to see if it will satisfy the three requirements listed above. In particular, look at restrictions on time and geographic scope. Consider the nature of the business you’re selling or buying to determine what seems reasonable. Don’t be greedy; that’s often the underlying case of such disputes. Rather, be conservative. You stand a better chance of having an enforceable agreement if you do.
You should also seek out the advice of an experienced business attorney like Gem McDowell. Contact Gem at their Mount Pleasant office at (843) 284-1021 today.
How to Protect Your Interests With Enforceable Covenants Not to Compete
South Carolina is a state that values an individual’s freedom to work. Because of that, it does not look kindly on contracts that try to restrict a person from working.
This can be tricky for employers trying to protect their interests. Many employers require employees to sign covenants not to compete, which are intended to prevent them from taking trade secrets and sensitive information to a competitor and/or staring their own competing company. But if the covenant not to compete isn’t written correctly, it won’t be worth the paper it’s written on. So here’s how to write one that might hold up in South Carolina court – and a couple extra things to think about, too.
Three things to address in your covenant not to compete
The keyword is reasonable. You have to be reasonable about what, when, and where your employee can work after they leave your employ.
1) Scope
The scope of duties cannot be restricted in an unreasonable way. If one of your employees writes the company newsletter, you cannot restrict them from writing anything at all after leaving your company. The scope in that case is simply too broad.
2) Duration
A “safe,” reasonable duration is typically two years. Any longer might cross over into unreasonable territory.
3) Geographic Location
This one’s interesting. Many covenants not to compete contain seemingly innocuous clauses that say something to the effect that the employee cannot work at a similar company within a 50-mile radius. That doesn’t seem that unreasonable at first glance – surely that leaves plenty of potential customers and places to do business – but it is.
You’ll remember from high school geometry that the area of a circle is πr2, which in this case equals over 7,854 square miles (3.14159*50*50). The state of South Carolina is only 32,000 square miles. Not so reasonable now, is it? A full quarter of the state is now off-limits. Even a 10-mile radius essentially covers all of Charleston County.
There’s no hard-and-fast rule here about what is considered “reasonable.” You’ll need to use your judgment, and get the advice of a business attorney, to draft a geography clause in your covenant not to compete that’s more likely to hold up in court.
How you, the employer, can protect your interests
As stated above, South Carolina is not known for looking kindly on strict covenants not to compete. But some states are. So a company may add a “forum clause” that says if disputes arise, they’ll be settled in a court in a state like Florida, which is more favorable to employers in these cases.
Another way to protect your interests and keep sensitive information out of competitors’ hands is to focus more on non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and confidentiality agreements than on covenants not to compete. Because NDAs and confidentiality agreements don’t tend to restrict a person’s freedom to work, the South Carolina Court doesn’t enforce them so heavily in favor of the employee as it does with covenants not to compete. That is, the Court’s decision is likely to be more favorable towards you, the employer, rather than the employee. (The 2012 case Milliken & Company v. Morin set this precedent.)
Get advice on creating your reasonable covenants not to compete
Need help with your contracts, covenants not to compete, and other business documents? Contact business attorney Gem McDowell at their Mount Pleasant office at (843) 284-1021 today.
How A Buy-Sell Agreement Is Like Monopoly
Imagine sitting down with someone to play Monopoly, and it’s the first time ever for both of you. What do you do first? After you each pick a token – the top hat, the Scottie dog – you read out the rules so you both know how the game works.
Pass Go, collect $200. Not $600. Not $800. Land on Free Parking, you get the money in the middle of the board. You don’t just take the money when you feel like it. The game works best when every player is aware of the rules and follows them.
Business is the same way.
When you start a business with other people, you all have to agree on “the rules of the game,” the way things will work in your business. Drafting corporate governance documents is the best way to do this. One of the most important documents is the buy-sell agreement.
The Buy-Sell Agreement Sets the Rules of Business in Advance
A buy-sell agreement is like a pre-nuptial agreement for the business. Instead of saying what will happen when you divorce, it says what will happen when a particular event arises, like a partner being convicted of fraud or becoming disabled.
With a solid buy-sell agreement in place, owners run the company knowing that whatever arises, there is a pre-determined course of action that will take place. It can prevent partners from panicking and having to figure out what to do on the fly or, in some cases, suing each other.
Every business with more than one owner should have a buy-sell agreement in place.
The 8 Parts of a Buy-Sell Agreement
When you prepare a buy-sell agreement for your business at Gem McDowell Law Group, you and your partners will be taken through eight parts. Together with Gem, you’ll create a document that is tailored to your business and meets your needs. That is to say, this is not a cookie cutter document. It’s created for your business alone.
Each one of the eight parts asks you to consider a potential situation and how you’d like to deal with it, should it occur. They are:
1. Borrow money against shares. When an owner or shareholder borrows money against their shares, it can have an impact on the business. Many companies only a partner to borrow against their shares if 75% or 100% of the partners agree to it.
2. Voluntary transfer. What if one of the owners wants to give some shares to his wife? Well, you agreed to be in business with him, not his wife. The buy-sell agreement can prevent that transfer from taking place. Partners can agree upon who can and cannot be given shares in the business through voluntary transfer.
3. Involuntary transfer. This could happen when a bank forecloses on a shareholder’s shares of stock, for example.
4. Discontented owner. Let’s say that in a company with 8 owners, 7 think that the 8th is untrustworthy and want her out. Your buy-sell agreement can make a provision where if a quorum wants that partner gone, she can be forcibly bought out.
5. Crimes of moral turpitude. This legal term refers to a variety of crimes contrary to community standards of justice, honesty or good morals. If an owner of the business is convicted of such a crime, it could be very bad for the company as a whole. For that reason, the remaining owners may decide that a partner guilty of such a crime can be forcibly bought out.
6. Buyout because of retirement. AKA, one of the partners is not working hard enough. The agreement can include a stipulation about how many hours each owner must work in order to be in good standing, and if they don’t work that many hours, what the consequences are. Each owner may have a different number of hours, if, for example, one partner contributes money rather than manpower.
7. Disability. What happens to the business if one of the owners becomes disabled and can no longer work?
8. Death. A buy-sell agreement can include the terms of the buyout of the deceased partner’s share, such as whether the buyout is immediate or part immediate, part later.
Creating a buy-sell agreement early on in your business is smart because you and your partners are more likely to think about each situation in a clear and fair manner. After problems arise, it’s more difficult to get everyone on board – it’s like trying to create the rules of Monopoly after someone has landed on Free Parking. It’ll be a lot tougher getting the other players to agree that landing on Free Parking means you get the dough from the middle of the board. At that point, you’ll wish you had agreed on the rules at the start.
“Do I Really Need a Buy-Sell Agreement?”
The only way it’s remotely close to being okay to not having a buy-sell agreement is if you’re the only person in your business. If you’re in business with someone else, you need to have this and other corporate governance documents. Even if they’re not required by law, it’s just smart business to have them.
Learn More About Buy-Sell Agreements
Whether you’re in the early stages of creating a new business or you’ve been in business for years, call the Charleston office of business attorney Gem McDowell at 843-284-1021 to discuss how he and his associatess can help you. They work with companies to create tailored buy-sell agreements, capital call agreements, non-disclosure agreements, covenants not to compete and more.
5 Ways A Business Lawyer Helps Grow And Protect Your Business
Business law, or corporate law, is the application of law to the business world. The two are completely intertwined at all times. For that reason, as a business owner you should plan to work closely with a business attorney throughout the life of your company, right from the very start. Here are 5 common ways a business lawyer can help you and your business.
1. A business lawyer will help you create your business.
This is called “choice of entity” and it’s a crucial step every business owner must take. Should you be an LLC? A corporation? If so, what kind? Both provide shelter from creditors to your personal assets, but the two entities are very different from one another. Furthermore, there are four ways to structure limited liability companies in South Carolina, and numerous ways to structure corporations.
An experienced business attorney can advise you on which entity is right for you and can tell you the potential pitfalls that you won’t read about on LegalZoom or other DIY sites.
2. A business lawyer can draft your corporate governance documents.
Corporate governance documents describe, govern and constrain activity of the business owners. They “set the rules” and tell everyone involved how things should go and what should happen when a particular occasion arises. They are unique to each business.
You absolutely should have these documents if your company has two or more owners/shareholders/partners (these terms will be used interchangeably through the rest of this article, though they are technically different). Here are some you might consider having:
Bylaws detail how the business is structured and give information on the board of directors, the responsibilities of the owners and more.
An Operating Agreement details how much each member owns in the company, how profits and losses will be allocated, what each member’s responsibilities are, how the company should be managed and more.
A Buy-Sell Agreement is essentially a “pre-nup” for the company. This document lays out what will happen in the event that one of the owners or shareholders dies, becomes ill, simply stops working, etc.
A Capital Call Agreement spells out what happens when the company needs to raise money and what happens when one of the partners can’t come up with their part. A partner who can’t contribute equally may lose voting rights, give up shares, or forego distributions, for example.
Non disclosure agreements (NDAs) and covenants not to compete are intended to protect your company against a former owner or employee running off with your trade secrets and your best customers, thereby hurting your business.
Question: Can you DIY? Should you?
Google these documents and you’ll find plenty of examples and templates you can download and fill in yourself – but don’t do it! Those documents might have been created in a different state, or before a significant change in the law, and they may not be valid. They were certainly drafted for a different business, for different people with different needs from yours. No two businesses are alike, and no two sets of governance documents should be alike.
Question: When is the best time to get these documents?
The best time to draft these documents is at the birth of your new company, when it’s likely that you’ll come up with documents that are fair to all parties. Imagine three years down the road, when one of your partners can’t come up with the money for a capital call – do you think they will want to sign a capital call agreement penalizing non-payment with a high rate of interest? Probably not. To avoid situations like that, it’s best to do it as early as possible, when all the owners feel goodwill towards each other. However, if you’re years into your business and still don’t have them, get something drafted now. Every single company faces issues that these documents address, so it’s not a matter of if but of when something will happen.
3. A business lawyer advises you on the best course of action and helps protect you from potential problems.
A lawyer is often referred to as “attorney and counselor-at-law.” A lawyer both applies the law and provides counsel on it. During a company’s growth, a business lawyer will be most helpful providing counsel on various issues that pertain to the law in order to deal with problems as they arise or, better yet, prevent them in the first place.
Contracts are the area in which you’ll probably need the most regular help from an attorney. As a business owner, you should have a lawyer familiar with your business draft your contracts and look over contracts given to you before signing. Other issues attorneys can help with may include long-range planning (see #4 on succession planning below), drafting terms & conditions for a website, advising on letters received, and, in the case of an attorney experienced in real estate law like Gem McDowell, rezoning or buying and selling land, to name just a few.
4. A business lawyer helps you with succession planning.
Succession planning allows all partners to come to an agreement about what will happen when one of the partners retires and leaves the company. Succession planning usually happens when one partner starts thinking about retirement.
5. A business lawyer represents you in litigation.
Working with a lawyer in the four situations above should hopefully reduce the likelihood that you’ll ever be involved in a lawsuit – and that’s really the point. Litigation is costly, lengthy and stressful for all parties. By being proactive and working with a business attorney from Day 1, you can sidestep the landmines that could otherwise destroy your business.
Learn more about how a business lawyer can help your business
Contact South Carolina attorney Gem McDowell and his associatess at their Charleston office at 843-284-1021 to discuss your company and its legal needs. Whether you’re thinking of starting a new entity or you’ve been running a thriving business for decades, it’s never too late to get legal advice from lawyers with experience in corporate law.
