Strict compliance with contractual conditions precedent, yea or nay? In New York, it depends.
Now, the general rule is that strict compliance with contractual conditions precedent is required. The New York Court of Appeals has previously held: “Express conditions must be literally performed, substantial performance will not suffice” (MHR Capital Partners LP v Presstek,
After three years of litigation, can a petitioner abruptly withdraw a business dissolution proceeding without consequences? A recent decision from Justice Reed in the New York County Commercial Division answers that question with a decisive “No.”
Continue Reading Indecision Has a Price: Withdraw Lawsuit, Pay Hefty Fee Award
This week’s New York Business Divorce takes us to the Garden State for a delightfully-written, post-trial decision by retired, recalled Appellate Division Judge Clarkson S. Fisher, Jr.
Cheshun v Sikand, Opinion [NJ Super Ct, Monmouth County May 7, 2025]), was a dissolution proceeding under New Jersey’s version of the Revised Uniform Limited Liability Company Law (“RULLCA”) between two 50/50 LLC member-managers who founded and operated an entity they hoped would perform clinical drug trials, but which never really got off the ground.
A couple of lessons emerge from Cheshun.
First, it seems obligatory for close entity owners and their litigation counsel to throw stones, cast aspersions, and lay blame for the business’s demise. But like marriages, sometimes business relationships fail because of good faith disagreements and reasonable, dashed expectations. Sometimes nobody is to blame. And that is ok.
Second, business owners may agree to part ways, but the decision to do so does not sever the existence of one’s ongoing fiduciary duties. Fiduciary duties continue through the conclusion of the wind up process. In the words of Judge Fisher, where a business entity is in a “state of un-woundedness,” failure to heed one’s fiduciary duties – even after an agreement to separate – can prove costly.Continue Reading A Message of Acceptance from the Garden State
This week’s New York Business Divorce discusses a case involving an LLC member dispute in which the plaintiff was hoisted on his own petard or, to paraphrase an email that came to light in discovery, stepped into his own “wolverine trap.”
Continue Reading LLC Minority Member Gets Caught in His Own “Wolverine Trap”
In this week’s business divorce follies, an imprecisely-drafted notice of default and cure letter leads to a stunning defeat for a group of limited partners who tried to remove a limited partner “for cause” under the partnership agreement.
Contracts with “prevailing party” fee-shifting provisions offer the tantalizing, coveted prospect of the winner recovering attorneys’ fees from the loser in legal disputes over the contract’s breach. But when the parties bombard each other with legal claims, and neither recovers on much (or any) of them, the hard question of whether either side (or any side) “prevailed” can lead to years of litigation within litigation. Read more in this week’s New York Business Divorce.
Continue Reading “Prevailing Party” Attorneys’ Fee Provisions
In this week’s New York Business Divorce, read about the grand finale conclusion of two important cases previously featured on this blog, with massive affirmed attorneys’ fee awards in both, one by statute, one by contract.
Continue Reading Two Cases. Two Mammoth Fee Awards. Coup de Grâce or Pyrrhic Victory?
In this week’s New York Business Divorce, read about a rare punitive damages award in a business divorce case after a majority owner misappropriated a 25% interest in a sushi restaurant, secretly transferred the entity’s assets to another he owned, then dissolved the original, all unbeknownst to the minority owner.
Continue Reading Bad Things Can Happen When You Steal a Business from a Minority Co-Owner
In this week’s New York Business Divorce, read about an unusually brazen case of misappropriation of corporate opportunity culminating in a hefty judgment against the perpetrators, including punitive damages and an accounting surcharge.
Continue Reading Misappropriated Watering Hole Becomes Money Judgment Sinkhole
In this week’s New York Business Divorce, we continue to explore the subject of advancement and indemnification of legal fees, this time under the laws of Delaware.
Continue Reading The Contract is King: Advancement and Indemnification Under Delaware Law