Cleve and I recently discussed how a business owner’s divorce might result in losing control of the business. While loss of business control by marital divorce is a real threat, many business owners lose their companies through “business divorces” after squabbling with their investors.
Some new businesses are overnight successes, like Ben Distiller’s Texas Whiskey
With an ongoing Oklahoma divorce case in mind last month Tilting wrote about Tigh A. Knott, his wife Lucy Knott and how a business owner’s divorce can impact his business and affect his partners. The real players were Harold Hamm and his wife Sue Ann.
Last week the court granted Oklahoma oil tycoon Harold
To the other four minority owners who enjoyed the meteoric rise of Meddlin Hands Cleaning Products, when Lucy Knott sued their majority partner Tigh A. Knott for divorce, the divorce was anything but routine. Lucy wants half of the business and day to day participation. With no company agreement, the other shareholders face the
Returning from a tri
p to West Africa with some college buddies, Ben X. Posed, a waiter at Chotchkie’s, showed up for work with a fever, muscle aches, a strong headache, and stomach pains. Begging his boss Dee Manding for the rest of the day off, Ben complained of his aches and pains and
I.M. Dense, a stockbroker employed by BI Lough was driving to a non-business event when he struck and injured a motorcyclist. On personal time, in a personal vehicle and using a personal cell phone, Dense admitted that he was responding with text messages to “cold call” responses from earlier in the day. “Cold calls” are a common practice at BI Lough. Did I.M. Dense break the law? Even if he did not commit a crime / violation, is he responsible just for being on the phone? What about Dense’s employer BI Lough?
Texting Against the Law?
Maybe. It depends upon where I.M. Dense was and how old he is. If he is under 18 or in a school zone, he broke state law. Texas state law prohibits anyone under the age of 18 from driving and using wireless communications devices or from using a handheld device in a school zone. If I.M. Dense was texting and driving within the city limits of any one of 23 Texas towns including, for example, Austin, El Paso and San Antonio, he violated a city ordinance. Being ticketed for violating a city ordinance does not carry the same penalties as a state moving violation that would affect Dense’s driving record.Continue Reading Texting Trouble: Who’s Liable?
When Wei Wong, owner of Sushi Mushi, a popular Japanese food bistro in Texas, installed a phone add-on to take credit and debit card payments straight from his employees’ phones, his revenues skyrocketed. Yesterday the Feds told him that his customers’ credit and debit card numbers were posted for sale on an underground website. Malware planted in his employees’ point-of-sale telephone systems snared over 10,000 card numbers, encrypted PINs, and CVV codes. Every hacker in the Ukraine now wants their own missile launch system. Is Sushi Mushi to blame?
Continue Reading Cyber Security: Forewarned is Fair-Warned
Taking advantage of his car dealership owning parents being on vacation in the Bahamas, Cache Bar, a minor, invites his high school buddies over to liberate his parents’ locked libation cabinet. Well lubricated, Cache builds quite the bonfire in the backyard knowing that no one in their hometown of Daughtry, Texas, can water their lawns because of the severe drought. The bonfire consumes Cache’s backyard grass, and then spreads and destroys three million-dollar mansions on Cache’s street. When Cache is charged with intentionally starting a fire that recklessly damaged his neighbors’ homes, his parents scramble for a defense to help him avoid arson charges – a state jail felony. Cache’s parents read a news article about another Texas teenager who avoided jail by asserting an “affluenza” defense – that the teenager was the product of wealthy, privileged parents who never set limits for their son. Will “affluenza” keep Cache out of jail? If so, does that affect his parents?
Monitoring his emails and gazing at the sights on Elafonisi beach in Crete, attorney Al B. Wise receives a desperate 4:30 a.m. (Texas time) email from his best client Betty Makit Williams – “Going under Slim Cutter’s knife in four hours for emergency surgery. No will. Can you get me one in case I don’t make it?” Sadly, Betty Makit did not make it. Did her will on a Post It?
Yes, at least in Texas. Knowing that a formal will was out of the question, Al B. Wise advised Betty Makit to write a holographic will – her last will and testament, completely in her own handwriting and signed by her. In addition to a will on a Post It note, Texas heirs have successfully probated wills written on a bedroom wall and on the fender of a vehicle. Even a Canadian will of a man trapped underneath was successful by probating the tractor’s fender as the will. About half of the states permit holographic wills.Continue Reading Last-Minute Wills….What Counts?
By now, you’ve probably heard about the IRS claiming they lost emails pertaining to the investigation of conservative groups applying for 501(c)(4) status. If you’re interested in a tax attorney’s perspective, watch Gray Reed’s own David Gair on LXBNTV.
Arriving at his warehouse last week Knott Faire, owner of Faire Carpet Cleaning, discovered yet another complaining critique posted on WELP: “Lots of hype, a mediocre cleaning and a hassle at the end. Don’t get tied up with Knott!” In over 75 previous reviews only 3 were slightly negative. Since the “hype” complaint, another dozen scathing complaints were logged. Believing that the negative reviews are from a competitor, not his customers, Knott called his trusty lawyer Icahn Ficksit for help. Icahn issued WELP a subpoena demanding production of identifying information and ISP (Internet Service Provider) addresses for the dozen offenders. Will Ficksit win?
In Virginia, yes; in Texas, no. The Virginia Court of Appeals held that a Yelp reviewer is generally entitled to First Amendment protection if the reviewer is critiquing a business they patronized; however, [i]f the reviewer was never a customer of the business, then the review is not an opinion; but is based on a false statement. Virginia only requires that Icahn Ficksit and Knott Faire show, among other things, that the WELP reviews “are or may be tortious or illegal,” or that Faire Carpet Cleaning has “a legitimate, good faith basis” to believe that they were the victim of actionable conduct.