Before the pandemic, Ernest Bux’s niece Chit Bux signed a lease with Iona Mall in an upscale strip shopping center and hired a contractor to build out her dream business – a beauty salon “Cuts & Fluffs.” When Dallas County ordered businesses to shutter last spring, Chit’s “essential business” construction on her salon continued toward meeting the originally scheduled July 1st opening date – perhaps the worst time to open a high-touch, close-quarters beauty salon. Having dealt with other unsuccessful startups in that same space, Iona needed Cuts & Fluffs to succeed; Chit needed a different opening date – much later when people were less fearful of crowds. Chit called Iona, her contractor and her banker who was shepherding her SBA loan. Can Chit work something out with Iona without completely modifying her lease? Continue Reading Can an Email Exchange Modify a Lease?
The extraordinary measures designed to slow the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19) continue to cause constitutional clashes. My last 
Driving through Oklahoma recently and watching 
In an attempt to slow the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19), the county judge has issued a shelter-in-place order that prohibits all public gatherings. Violations are a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of $1,000 or 180 days imprisonment. Defying the order, Reverend Elmer Gantry opens his church on Sunday morning to a smaller but still enthusiastic congregation. As the members leave at the end of the service, they are met by a sheriff’s deputy, who hands each of them a ticket for violating the order. Reverend Gantry proclaims that fining people for attending church violates their constitutional right to freely exercise their religion. Will the First Amendment be their salvation? 
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. Landman’s January email stated “Pursuant to our conversation earlier, Nodding Donkey agrees to pay you $70.00 per foot for the second 24 inch line it proposes to build.” Big Daddy responded “We accept.” Subsequent Nodding Donkey exhibits attached to an email depicted the new easement both on the North and South sides of the existing pipeline and offered $15 to $25 per foot. Yet another email from Big Daddy attached a proposed amendment to the R.O.W. agreement between the parties. Does Big Daddy have an enforceable agreement at $70 per foot? Can an email exchange create an enforceable contract? What about the Statute of Frauds?
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?