April 23, 2008 Attorneys Signing Contracts?

Victoria Pynchon—she of the Settle It Now Negotiation Blog—asked me the following question:
While I was practicing, it was common for the opposition to put signature lines on settlement agreements for the attorneys’ signatures. I always refused to sign these, saying, “I’m not a party to this contract and I don’t think my signature adds anything […]

April 14, 2008 “Dated for Reference”

I often come away from a seminar having learned something new.
For example, a participant at my recent Vancouver seminar asked me what I thought of the phrase dated for reference, as used in the introductory clause. I confessed that I hadn’t previously encountered it.
After I arrived home, I searched on Lexis for use of the […]

April 14, 2008 When an Individual’s Address Doesn’t Work for Purposes of the Introductory Clause

I don’t include in the introductory clause the address of a party that’s a legal entity. That’s because the introductory clause serves to distinguish a given party from any other person or entity with that name. For a legal entity, that’s accomplished by giving its jurisdiction of organization or its registration number; you don’t also […]

March 25, 2008 When a Party Has a Limited Role in a Transaction

Special thanks to reader Tony for reminding me of a usage that had slipped my mind: becoming party to a contract with respect to only certain provisions.
For example, in an acquisition, the buyer’s parent might be party to the acquisition agreement solely to guarantee the buyer’s obligations or solely to undertake to pay a termination […]

February 16, 2008 Stating that Recitals Are “True and Correct”

In the past year, 265 contracts filed as “material contracts” on the SEC’s EDGAR database contained a provision stating that the recitals were true and accurate. Here’s an example:
The above recitals are hereby made a part of this Agreement and the Borrower acknowledges and agrees that each of the recitals is true and correct.
That’s not […]

February 7, 2008 When Performance Under a Contract Is by a Division

Here’s yet another issue regarding the introductory clause that I haven’t previously written about: How, if at all, should you address in the introductory clause the fact that performance under the contract will be by a division of a company?
You could ignore it. After all, the company will be on the hook, not the division, […]

January 11, 2008 Including “Plan of Merger” in the Title of a Merger Agreement

Here’s another fresh extract from the manuscript of MSCD2. It’s from the section “The Title,” and it addresses at greater length something I mention in MSCD 2.3:
And don’t feel obligated to track the terminology of state statutes. For example, statutes in Nevada, New York, and other states use the term “plan of merger.” As a […]

January 11, 2008 Contracts Under Seal?

I’ve snickered at the notion of contracts under seal, but I’ve never studied the topic. Here’s what I found out:
In medieval England, a seal—consisting of wax attached to a writing and bearing an impression—served as a marker to identify the parties to an agreement. As literacy increased, signatures slowly replaced seals as identifying markers.
And the […]

December 28, 2007 Using Company Numbers in the Introductory Clause

In this comment to an October 2007 post, reader Michael Fleming said the following:
Speaking of things we find in the introductory clause—How about some research and commentary into the British drafting habit (or is it a requirement???) of including the “company number” as part of the name of the corporate party (e.g., “Top Hat, Ltd., […]

October 14, 2007 Eliminating Incidental Information from the Introductory Clause

Last year I drafted the following introductory clause to a merger agreement:
This merger agreement is dated March 23, 2006, and is between DARIUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a California corporation (“Parent”), SWORDFISH ACQUISITION, INC., a California corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Parent (“Sub”), TROMBONE SOFTWARE, INC., a Delaware corporation (“Target”), and the stockholders of Target, namely […]

October 14, 2007 “Frontloading”—A New Term is Unleashed on an Unsuspecting Planet

Way back in this August 2006 post I described how select information is often pulled out of the body of a commercial contract and placed at the top. In my post I expressed reservations about this practice, but the commenters set me straight.
I referred to this practice as “the box,” given that the abstracted information […]

October 9, 2007 How Not to Incorporate a Virtual Attachment, Part Deux

In this March 2007 post I discussed language to use, and language not to use, when making an ancillary document—including a web page—part of a contract without physically attaching it. (I subsequently invented the term “virtual attachment” to describe any such ancillary document.)
What prompted that post was a case that held that saying that the […]

October 7, 2007 Don’t Use in Purpose Recitals the Phrase “In Accordance with this Agreement”

Consider the following purpose recital, plucked from an agreement filed last month on the SEC’s EDGAR system:
WHEREAS, in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Asset Purchase Agreement, Buyer desires that Seller Manufacture (as defined herein) and supply certain Products to Buyer, and Seller desires to Manufacture and supply such Products to Buyer in accordance […]

September 4, 2007 Using Defined Terms in the Recitals

Here’s a point that I don’t make in MSCD but will be sure to make in MSCD2: Don’t use in the recitals defined terms that are defined later in the contract.
The job of the recitals is to introduce the transaction. If you put in the recitals a defined term that’s defined later, you force the […]

July 9, 2007 Any Excuse to Revisit the Traditional Recital of Consideration

Via Ray Ward of the (new) legal writer, I learned that Lowering the Bar had a take on the saga of the contract written in blood.
I’d previously heard about this story but I didn’t think it had much bearing on what I do—my notion of what falls under the rubric “contract drafting” isn’t broad enough […]

June 29, 2007 Having Parties Date Their Signatures—Seeking Comments on Draft Language

In this blog post, I described how in certain circumstances you might want to date a contract by having the parties date their signatures rather than by including a date in the introductory clause. I also mentioned how adopting that approach would require that you use a different concluding clause than the one you’d use […]

May 30, 2007 Using Recitals to Tell a Story

I recently reviewed for a company a draft settlement agreement that had been prepared by outside counsel retained by the company. I thought the draft needed help. In particular, I found the recitals bloated and vague:
RECITALS
A. As of the date of this Settlement Agreement a dispute exists between AcmeTek and Widgetz regarding the contracts made between […]

April 25, 2007 Revenue Recognition and How You Date Contracts

One of the pleasures of contract drafting is that the parties are as a general matter left to their own devices. Of course you have to structure any given transaction in a way that takes into account legal, tax, regulatory, or other considerations, but as a rule how you do that is up to you.
But […]

August 20, 2006 Issues in Drafting Commercial Agreements—The “Box”

My background is in drafting for deals rather drafting commercial agreements. (By “commercial agreement” I mean, vaguely enough, a form agreement relating to the supply of goods, services, or technology to customers.) But in my consulting activities, I’ve recently been dealing exclusively with commercial agreements.
Because any given commercial agreement will likely be entered into dozens […]

June 21, 2006 Schedules and Exhibits as Part of a Contract

It’s commonplace for drafters to assume that unless they say so explicitly, schedules and exhibits attached to a contract don’t constitute part of that contract. Here’s an assortment of contract language reflecting this assumption:
Schedule A constitutes a part of this agreement.
All exhibits referenced in this agreement are made a part of this agreement.
The exhibits and […]

May 31, 2006 Recitals of Consideration Under Canadian Law

In MSCD (¶¶ 2.64–71) and a Business Law Today article on the subject, I recommend strongly that drafters dispense with the traditional recital of consideration.
The traditional recital of consideration is the consideration language that clogs the lead-in to the body of the contract in a majority of contracts. The language varies, but here’s an example […]