Reeling from months of governmental orders that required all restaurants to close their doors, Chez Quis was elated to re-open and welcome back its diners, even at a reduced capacity. But elation quickly turned to despair when Chez Quis learned that one of its longtime customers, Abe Froman, had sued the restaurant for allegedly contracting the coronavirus (COVID-19) while dining there. Has Chez Quis jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire?
Continue Reading Stay Shut Down or Be Sued? The Risk to Your Business from COVID-19 Premises-Liability Claims
Driving through Oklahoma recently and watching 
Wanting to diversify his investments, Ernest “Big Daddy” Bux signed a franchise agreement with GA Fitness last year. Construction by Big Daddy’s contractor Bill Toosuit is scheduled to be completed for in time for an early May grand opening in the new strip center owned and managed by Mawl & Mawl. Last week, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the town’s mayor and the state governor prohibited any gathering of more than 10 people and directed that all bars, restaurants and gymnasiums close. Now that gymnasiums are prohibited from opening, Big Daddy’s business is almost certain to fail, and Mawl & Mawl loses a tenant. If Big Daddy stops construction and buys out his current lease obligation, Bill Toosuit loses his construction project and Mawl & Mawl loses a long-term tenant. Can Big Daddy get out of his lease obligations? And his construction contract? Are there other options to get to a win-win?
Sometime ago Ernest “Big Daddy” Bux conveyed a pipeline easement to Nodding Donkey Pipelines for the construction, operation and maintenance of a 24-inch pipeline across his Big Bux Ranch. In an email sent before Christmas, Lannie Landman with Nodding Donkey requested an easement for a second pipeline on the North side of the existing line.
Frasier and Niles fulfill a lifelong dream by purchasing a treasured but faded restaurant through their company, Crane Brothers, LLC. They rechristen their restaurant as “Les Freres Heureux” and file an assumed name certificate registering that name. Frasier also signs multiple contracts to renovate the building and purchase food, beverages, and furniture in the following manner: “Les Freres Heureux by its president, Frasier Crane.” Unfortunately, opening night is a disaster, and the restaurant quickly closes its doors. Frasier and Niles put Crane Brothers, LLC into bankruptcy, so unpaid vendors begin suing Frasier, arguing that he is personally liable for the contracts he signed. Is Frasier in the soup?
The President of First Bank of Buxboro Ernest “Big Daddy” Bux is growing older, and he’s showing it. Despite tightening bank regulations on lending and credit documentation, Big Daddy seems to be getting even more lax. Moreover, just last week – during important loan renewal negotiations with the Bank’s largest customer – Big Daddy could not remember the name of the company or the name of its principal. Do the directors of First State Bank owe any legal responsibility to the FDIC as the insurer? Do the Bank directors have any legal responsibilities to the Bank? What about Big Daddy, personally, does he have rights?
On December 26, Marty and Dave McFly were playing video games when, downstairs in the living room, the hoverboard that Marty had received for Christmas ignited. The fire quickly engulfed the Christmas tree and spread throughout the house. Marty and Dave escaped with minor injuries, but their house was destroyed. Since the McFlys had bought the hoverboard from Amazon.com, they sued the company, alleging that it sold them a defective product and failed to warn them that it was unsafe. Amazon, however, argues that it is not responsible because it did not manufacture or even sell the hoverboard. Instead, it merely set up a marketplace by which a third-party Chinese manufacturer sold the hoverboard. Is the McFlys’ lawsuit up in smoke?
In this series on defining wins in litigation, we’ve talked about defining the goals and strategies at the outset, clear and open communication, and the benefits of resolving a dispute both financially and reputationally. The final piece in this series discusses why mitigating the plaintiff’s damage recovery can also be a “win”. I can speak from experience because I have effectively used this strategy for a client.