COVID-19 Update: FAQ and Other Information for Clients

Articles Posted in Business Litigation and Dispute Resolution

Practice Area

Best-Lawyers-2022-Headshots-Only-1024x624Kang Haggerty & Fetbroyt LLC is pleased to announce that three of the firm’s attorneys have been selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© 2022. Congratulations to Henry J. Donner, Gregory H. Mathews and Kandis L. Kovalsky.

Donner also received recognition as “Lawyer of the Year” in the practice of Litigation – Construction for Philadelphia.

Attorneys were recognized in the following practice areas for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:

Data-Transfer-1024x576In the July 8, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang and Ryan T. Kirk of Kang Haggerty co-authored “Protective Orders in the Age of E-Discovery.

Electronic discovery and its transformational consequences have been a defining feature of 21st century litigation. The sheer proliferation of data and associated complexity has necessitated the development of specialized software to manage and catalog this information. Data have become so complex that protocols surrounding metadata, i.e., data about data, have become a regular aspect of the discovery process. Agreements regarding the use and discoverability of electronically stored information (ESI) are commonplace in any case with a sufficiently large volume of documents. Continue reading ›

Three coworkers collaborating. In the June 24, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty, wrote “A Primer on Pennsylvania’s Participation Theory.

One of the primary benefits of organizing a business as a corporation (or similar entity) is limited liability protection. By establishing the corporation as a separate legal entity, its actions become distinct from the individuals running it. For the corporation’s shareholders, this provides downside certainty; the maximum liability exposure they face (in general) is the value of their investment. Since the losses stemming from personal liability are theoretically infinite, investors relish the corporate form’s ability to mitigate risk. Continue reading ›

Kang Haggerty is proud to congratulate Henry Donner, Of Counsel,  once again named the Senior Statesman for Construction Lawyers—Pennsylvania—in the 2021 edition of Chambers USA, which ranks the leading lawyers and law firms across the USA, based on in-depth market analysis and independent research.

Chambers notes that Henry “has vast experience litigating a range of construction disputes. His clients include condominium associations, contractors and real estate developers.”

Learn more about the Chambers USA Methodology here.

Woman on laptop sitting atop large book.Over both of counsel’s objections, the judge allowed the witness to continue with his testimony, in accordance with Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence 702 and 703 and the general acceptance test. This scenario raises the question: what materials can an expert witness rely on in Pennsylvania courts, which follows the Frye standard? And has this changed in recent years?

In the May 20, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Expert Witnesses in Pa.—What Materials Matter in Forming an Opinion?Continue reading ›

Please join Kang Haggerty Managing Member Edward T. Kang (panelist) and Member Kandis L. Kovalsky (moderator) for an upcoming CLE, The Complex Commercial Case in Arbitration, during the  Bucks County Bar Association’s Fourth Annual Business Law Institute on May 12, 2021 from 9:45-10:45 AM ET.

Edward and Kandis will be joined by fellow panelist Barbara Lyons, Founder of the Bucks County Mediation and Arbitration Center.

 

Two rows of prescription pill bottles

The opioid epidemic was a perfect storm, caused by years of over-promotion, over-prescription and dangerous marketing campaigns. Integral to this “perfect storm” was not just the drug manufacturers’ conduct, but also third parties, such as private equity and consulting companies, who all played critical roles.

In the April 15, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Holding Third Parties Liable for Their Role in Perpetuating the Opioid Crisis.Continue reading ›

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.

Contact Information