Introduction It is common in M&A deals for the seller to have the right to terminate an agreement by paying a significant termination fee; especially as part of a fiduciary out structure. The deal This case involves players in the…
Blog Archives
Fraud Carve-Out in APA’s Exclusive Remedy Provision Saves Buyer’s Employee Non-Solicitation Claim
Introduction Most acquisition agreements provide that the agreement’s indemnification provisions are the exclusive remedy for a contractual breach. However, it is also common to exclude fraud claims from this excusive remedy provision. The deal This deal involved the acquisition of…
Bootstrapping Doctrine No Bar to Business Buyer’s Fraud Claim
Introduction A buyer of a closely held business often has limited recourse against a seller if the deal turns out bad. Even if fraud is involved, the buyer must run the gauntlet of indemnification cap, survival period, exclusive remedy, non-reliance,…
Posted in bootstrapping doctrine, exclusive remedy, fraud carveout, fraud in business sale, non-reliance clause Tagged with: bootstrapping doctrine
APA Integration Provision and Exclusive Remedy Clause Bars Seller Claim
Introduction A seller of a mortgage service business could not sue its asset buyer in tort for negligent misrepresentation. The deal The seller was a Denver based company that was formed after the 2008 financial crisis to assess and verify…
Posted in earn out, economic loss doctrine, exclusive remedy, integration clause Tagged with: asset purchase agreement, entire agreement, promise not representation
Boilerplate provision (fraud carve-out) saves the buyer’s fraud lawsuit against the seller of a business
The seller owned and operated a food tray business that sold rigid trays, foam trays, and absorbent pads to food handlers and processors. In the summer of 2014, the seller sought to sell its North American foam tray and pads…
Posted in exclusive remedy, fraud carveout
Recent Comments