COVID-19 Update: FAQ and Other Information for Clients

Articles Posted in Business Litigation and Dispute Resolution

Practice Area

In the January 21, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Antitrust Suits Against Google Shows Damage Inflicted on Businesses, Consumers.

In reading the spate of recent antitrust actions taken against all-powerful search behemoth Google, you do not have to go very far to see damage done to businesses in our own backyard. A locally based (Paoli, Pennsylvania) search engine upstart DuckDuckGo, best known for protecting the privacy of its end-users, is one such business affected by Google’s monopoly. Continue reading ›

This CLE webinar will provide corporate counsel with guidance for drafting director and officer (D&O) indemnification provisions in bylaws, LLC operating agreements, limited partnership agreements, and other governance documents as well as contractual indemnification agreements. The panel will also discuss how indemnification provisions interact with a company’s D&O insurance policies. Panelists include Kang Haggerty managing member Edward T. Kang and Kang Haggerty member Kandis L. Kovalsky, with Brian H. Mukherjee, Counsel, Goodwin Procter.

D&O Indemnification Provisions in Corporate Governance Documents: Implementing 2020 DOJ Guidance is presented by Strafford Publications. The webinar will take place Tuesday, November 17th from 1-2:30 pm EST.

 

Org-Chart-1024x576In June, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted an appeal that could radically alter existing state law on corporate liability based on the veil-piercing theory. The case, arising from a dram shop tort action, is poised to test Pennsylvania law’s “strong presumption” against piercing the corporate veil.

In the November 5, 2020 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Pa. Supreme Court to Review Veil-Piercing Appeal Based on Enterprise Theory.

In June, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted an appeal that could radically alter existing state law on corporate liability based on the veil-piercing theory. The case, arising from a dram shop tort action, is poised to test Pennsylvania law’s “strong presumption” against piercing the corporate veil. Hoping to recover damages from an affiliated corporation that was not a defendant at trial, the plaintiff in Mortimer v. McCool, was granted an appeal on the basis of the so-called “single business enterprise” or “single entity” theory. See Mortimer v. McCool, Nos. 20 MAL 2020, (Pa. June 22, 2020). Not currently adopted in Pennsylvania, the theory may be applied to allow a plaintiff to reach the assets of one or more affiliated corporations of the debtor when those “corporations share common ownership and are, in reality, operating as a corporate combine.” See Miners v. Alpine Equipment, 722 A.2d 691,695 (Pa. Super. 1998). Courts discussing or adopting the enterprise theory have found its rightful target to be corporate entities that have integrated business ownership and assets to achieve a common business purpose. Thus, in an important sense, by operating what is essentially a “single business enterprise” split into multiple affiliated entities (often purely for the sake of avoiding liability), owners of such enterprises open the door for the courts to impose shared liability. In the past, I have written about veil-piercing in Pennsylvania generally, as well as in specific regard to LLCs and the “alter ego” theory. This column addresses the implications of the Mortimer appeal and the “enterprise” theory for Pennsylvania corporate liability law.

Kang Haggerty & Fetbroyt has received national recognition for its Construction Law practice in the U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” 2021. In addition, the firm was recognized in the Philadelphia Metropolitan listings for Commercial Litigation and Construction Law.

Firms included in the 2021 Edition of U.S. News – Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms” are recognized for professional excellence with consistently impressive ratings from clients and peers. To be eligible for a ranking, a firm must first have a lawyer recognized in The Best Lawyers in America©, which recognizes 5% of lawyers practicing in the United States. Achieving a tiered ranking signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal expertise.

The 2021 rankings are based on the highest lawyer and firm participation on record, incorporating 8.3 million evaluations of more than 110,000 individual leading lawyers from more than 22,000 firms.

Clipboard and Chart overlay on modern buildingPiercing the veil of limited liability companies (LLCs) allows a court to disregard the separate corporate personality of the company and its member(s) to reach the assets of the members and hold them liable for all or part of the LLC’s debts under Pennsylvania law.

In the September 3, 2020 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Piercing the Corporate Veil of LLCs Under Pennsylvania Law.

Piercing the veil of limited liability companies (LLCs) allows a court to disregard the separate corporate personality of the company and its member(s) to reach the assets of the members and hold them liable for all or part of the LLC’s debts under Pennsylvania law. Previously, I’ve written on the general substantive and procedural requirements of piercing the corporate veil of an entity and alter ego jurisdiction over corporate groups. This column addresses the Pennsylvania law on the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil as applied to LLCs.

Female judge holding notebook and gavel

With Complaints Rapidly Increasing across the U.S., Now is the time to act

As of May 26, 2020, 2,278 complaints have been filed nationwide over the global pandemic COVID-19 according to the COVID-19 Complaint Tracker developed by lawyers at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP. While the largest amount of these complaints deal with prison conditions and civil rights , the next highest areas of litigation involve insurance disputes, consumer disputes, labor and employment issues  and contract disputes. Claims regarding employment, contracts and force majeure provisions, or clauses contained in contracts which excuse performance due to natural destructive acts also known as “acts of God,” are on the rise. These complaints will continue to be filed as the effects of COVID-19 continue to be felt in ever-changing ways. Many of these complaints have been filed in jurisdictions where Kang Haggerty regularly practices—namely COVID-19 hot spots New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Continue reading ›

Business woman holding red notepad

In a changing COVID-19 world filled with new regulations, adjustments, and uncertainty, Kang Haggerty provides services to help our clients avoid litigation or to obtain favorable outcomes in litigation. Some COVID-19 services offered by Kang Haggerty that will help you address COVID-19-related issues include: Continue reading ›

Illustration of business paperwork by Megan RexazinMany businesses have now turned to the force majeure clauses present in their contracts—invoking the idea that the COVID-19 pandemic is an unforeseeable “act of God” that has hindered the ability of parties to perform their duties as agreed.

In the May 14, 2020 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Force Majeure During a Pandemic and Potential Contractual Disputes

In light of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, businesses and individuals alike have struggled with following through on contracts that were agreed upon long before the novel coronavirus was even discovered, let alone foreseen as the cause of a worldwide health crisis. Many have now turned to the force majeure clauses present in their contracts—invoking the idea that the COVID-19 pandemic is an unforeseeable “act of God” that has hindered the ability of parties to perform their duties as agreed. For those who do not have such clauses present in their contracts, can the same concept be invoked in a court of law?

HD Headshot with Recognition

Kang Haggerty & Fetbroyt, a boutique business litigation firm with offices in Philadelphia, PA and Marlton, NJ, is proud to once again congratulate Henry Donner, Of Counsel, named the Senior Statesman for Construction Lawyers—Pennsylvania—in the 2020 edition of Chambers USA.

As the only senior statesman for the construction law practice in PA, Chambers USA states that Donner has vast experience in litigating a range of construction disputes, noting that peers highlight him as “a legend in Pennsylvania.”

See the Chambers USA 2020 Review Here

Graphic shows two hands. One holding a contract that shows Force Majeure and the other hand signing.As a commercial transactional lawyer, I often speak to my clients and colleagues about contract management. While I am usually heavily involved in many stages of the contract lifecycle – most notably, negotiations, drafting, closings and amendments – the real work (and most problems) arise during contract performance, which is the time the contracting company is typically “on its own.”  I stress to my clients that competent management of contracts post-execution is critical: your management team needs to know its contractual obligations: due dates and milestones, payment terms, and areas of performance. Who’s doing what, when, and for how much?  I recommend companies appoint a contract manager to maintain each contract and its pertinent information, and create a database of performance, payment, and other obligation information, along with applicable deadlines and a “tickler” system.

Now, in the wake of COVID-19 and its tremendous impact on businesses, it is important to pull out those databases, and update them with information particular to the current state of operations – yours and your contracting partners. Continue reading ›

Contact Information