Articles Posted in I am in phase…

Help WantedBuilding a team is one of the most important steps in creating a successful business. Taking on employees, however, creates an employer-employee relationship that could fall under the jurisdiction of local, state, and federal employment laws. One issue in employment law that has received considerable attention in recent years is the use of criminal history in hiring decisions. Employers may be hesitant to bring on a new hire with a criminal record for a variety of reasons. Laws in many jurisdictions, however, restrict employers’ ability to use criminal history as a factor. New York City has one of the most restrictive laws in the country on this issue, and many jurisdictions are following its lead. New Jersey business owners may find their state’s law less restrictive, but it applies statewide.

Laws limiting businesses’ consideration of criminal history in employment decisions are often known as “Ban the Box” (BTB) laws. They prohibit employers from asking about criminal history during the initial stages of the job application process. The “box” that these laws ban is the checkbox on a typical job application form asking whether an applicant has ever been convicted of a felony or another offense. Checking that box, for some employers, could mean automatic rejection of the application. From job applicants’ point of view, this makes it difficult for certain individuals to find a job, regardless of whether their particular criminal history would have any impact on a particular job. If people with a criminal history cannot find a job, they might be more likely to commit more crimes. See, e.g. N.J. Rev. Stat. § 34:6B-12. Employers need to know their potential liability in this area.

The New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) generally prohibits discrimination on the basis of criminal convictions or arrest records. N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-107(10), (11). It also prohibits employers from discriminating in job advertisements, such as by stating that a job is only open to people without criminal records. Id. at § 8-107(11-a)(a)(1). Employers cannot inquire about a job applicant’s criminal history until they have made a “conditional offer of employment” to that individual. Id. at § 8-107(11-a)(a)(3).

Offensive balloonTrademark registration with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) protects businesses’ rights to the exclusive use of names, logos, and certain other designs used in commerce. Business names, product names, and logos associated with either of these are eligible for trademark protection if they meet the criteria established by the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq. Section 2(a) of the statute prohibits the registration of “immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter,” as well as “matter which may disparage” a wide range of individuals, institutions, or “national symbols.” Id. at § 1052(a). This provision, commonly known as the Disparagement Clause, was the subject of a dispute that went to the U.S. Supreme Court. In June 2017, the court held that the Disparagement Clause violates free speech rights under the First Amendment. Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. ___ (2017).

The Lanham Act establishes the general principle that the USPTO may not reject a proposed trademark registration unless it falls under certain specified exceptions. These include flags, seals, or other official symbols of the United States or any U.S. state, city, or other local jurisdiction, or foreign country. A trademark is also ineligible for registration if it uses a person’s likeness without their permission. Any proposed trademark must not be so similar to an existing registered mark that it is likely “to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.” 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d).

The Disparagement Clause prohibits the registration of any trademark that “may disparage…persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute.” Id. at § 1052(a). Determining whether or not a proposed mark is “disparaging” is highly subjective. Perhaps the most famous example of a trademark disparagement claim involves the professional football team in Washington, D.C. In one decision from that case, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) held that an evaluation of whether a mark is “disparaging” should look at the mark from the perspective of a “substantial composite” of the group allegedly being disparaged, rather than the point of view of the general public. Harjo v. Pro-Football, Inc., 50 U.S.P.Q.2d 1705 (TTAB 1999).

Continue Reading

Handicapped signThe Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., significantly affected businesses across the country, requiring them to install facilities to ensure accessibility for people with disabilities. After more than 25 years, this aspect of the ADA has become commonplace, but the ADA’s reach to online, “virtual” spaces is still a matter of dispute. As more and more business is conducted online, the issue of website accessibility has gained in importance. This refers to measures that allow people with disabilities, such as impaired vision, hearing, or mobility, to use a website. A recent trial in an ADA discrimination lawsuit is believed to be the first to address website accessibility under the ADA. Gil v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-23020, verdict and order (S.D. Fla., Jun. 12, 2017). The verdict, which found a business liable for failing to make its website accessible to an individual with vision impairment, could affect businesses all over the country.

Title III of the ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by “public accommodations,” which are defined broadly to include hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, laundromats and other service-oriented businesses, public transportation terminals, parks, museums, schools, and exercise or recreation venues like bowling alleys. 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7). The statute requires businesses “to design and construct facilities…that are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities,” unless doing so would be “structurally impracticable.” Id. at § 12183(a)(1). It set a deadline of “30 months after July 26, 1990.” Id. Perhaps the most common conception of an accommodation required by the ADA is a wheelchair ramp that allows access to a building. This is far from the only type of disability covered by the ADA, however.

Continue Reading

Chosen Group Light Bulbs Success Light BulbFor many businesses, intellectual property rights are their most important and valuable assets. Intellectual property refers to the legal right to use creative works, from a company name and logo to a new invention. The owner or holder of most types of legally protected intellectual property has the exclusive right to use the material in their business, or for any other purpose. This includes the right to license its use to other people or businesses, or to keep it for their own use.

Trade Secrets

Businesses often rely on information that has value primarily because of its confidentiality, also known as “trade secrets.” They might include client lists, internal business procedures, and business plans or strategies. Since their value depends on remaining confidential, businesses are not required to register them with a government office like a trademark, copyright, or patent. Instead, trade secret laws give businesses tools to prevent disclosure by employees and other insiders.

In order for information to qualify for trade secret protection under state law, it must meet three criteria: (1) it must “[d]erive[] independent economic value, actual or potential,” from being secret; (2) it must “not be[] readily ascertainable” by others who stand to benefit from it; and (3) it must be “the subject of [reasonable] efforts…to maintain its secrecy.” N.J. Rev. Stat. § 56:15-2. Individuals who misappropriate trade secrets may be liable to the business for damages. Theft of trade secrets may also be subject to federal criminal jurisdiction, under a law enacted last year. Pub. L. 114-153, 130 Stat. 376 (May. 11, 2016).
Continue Reading

Idea Innovation Bulb Energy Light Power LightbulbStarting a new business requires extensive planning, with regard to both the product or service that the business will offer and the structure and operations of the business itself. Protecting the new business’ assets is critically important, and this applies not only to its physical assets but its intellectual property as well. The brand names, logos, designs, business plans, and other creative works used by a business are all examples of intellectual property. State and federal laws provide multiple ways to protect a business’ intellectual property rights, but business owners must first understand the different types of intellectual property and the laws that protect them.

Defining “Property”

It might be easiest to define intellectual property in relation to other types of property:

Real property includes land and attached structures, such as houses and office buildings.
Personal property refers to movable property, such as a pencil, coffee mug, computer, car, or refrigerator.
Intangible property may include financial instruments like securities, although cash is often considered personal property.
Intellectual property, while also intangible, generally refers to the results of the creative process, such as designs, photographs, written works, and computer code.

Continue Reading

bookThe structure of a corporation establishes a division of rights and responsibilities among at least three groups. Ownership of the corporation is vested in the shareholders, while directors are charged with its overall management. Officers are responsible for the corporation’s day-to-day operations. A shareholder who is not also a director or officer may not have much of a role in the operation or management of a corporation, but they have rights to information about the corporation’s financial status. The Delaware Court of Chancery recently ruled in favor of a shareholder seeking access to a corporation’s books. Rodgers v. Cypress Semiconductor Corporation, No. 2017-0070-AGB, order (Del. Chanc. Ct., Apr. 17, 2017). The court’s order offers useful guidelines for shareholders seeking access to corporate information.

New Jersey law defines “shares” as “the units into which the proprietary interests in a corporation are divided,” and a “shareholder” as “a holder of record of shares in a corporation.” N.J. Rev. Stat. §§ 14A:1-2.1(l), (m). Any shareholder has the right to request financial documents, including balance sheets and profit and loss statements, from the corporation. Certain shareholders “have the right for any proper purpose to examine…[the corporation’s] minutes of the proceedings of its shareholders and record of shareholders.” Id. at § 14A:5-28(3).

Delaware law goes further, giving shareholders the right to inspect a wide range of corporate documents upon a “written demand under oath stating the purpose” of the shareholder’s request. 8 Del. Code § 220(b). If the corporation denies the shareholder’s demand, the shareholder can petition the Court of Chancery to compel production. A plaintiff in such a case must establish standing as a shareholder, compliance with the “form and manner of making a demand for inspection,” and a “proper purpose” for the inspection.” Id. at § 220(c).

Continue Reading

drinking glassConsumer protection laws allow the recovery of damages from businesses for various fraudulent or deceptive practices. These laws tend to define prohibited conduct in very general terms. Businesses that provide goods or services to the general public should be aware of the latest developments in consumer protection law in order to avoid unwitting liability for deceptive business practices. The New Jersey Supreme Court has agreed to hear two appeals of putative consumer class actions alleging deceptive pricing schemes against two restaurant chains. While these cases only directly involve alcohol sales, they demonstrate how major consumer complaints can arise from seemingly minor practices.

The New Jersey statutes at issue are the Consumer Fraud Act (CFA), N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 et seq., and the Truth in Consumer Contract Warranty and Notice Act (TCCWNA), id. at 56:12-14 et seq. Among the many acts prohibited by the CFA is the offered, attempted, or completed sale of retail goods without clearly stating “the total selling price.” Id. at § 56:8-2.5. The statute also prohibits “the knowing, concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact,” when such an action is intended to induce a consumer to make a purchase. Id. at § 56:8-2. The TCCWNA prohibits businesses from offering or entering into contracts with consumers that “violate[] any clearly established legal right of a consumer,” including a consumer’s rights under the CFA. Id. at § 56:12-15. Both statutes allow individual consumers to sue for damages. Id. at §§ 56:8-2.11, 56:12-17.

When an individual consumer’s damages are not enough to make the time and expense of pursuing a claim worthwhile, multiple consumers with similar claims can file a class action on behalf of all similarly situated consumers. To obtain class certification, the plaintiffs must be able to establish four elements:  (1) that the class is sufficiently numerous that it would not be practical to join every plaintiff individually; (2) that all class members have factual or legal issues in common; (3) that the claims of the plaintiffs are typical of the rest of the class; and (4) that the plaintiffs can “fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.” N.J.R.C. 4:32-1(a).

Continue Reading

New Jersey CapitolThe overall economic outlook for New Jersey is cautiously optimistic, at least according to some sources. The New Jersey Business & Industry Association (NJBIA) describes a gradual increase in “business confidence” in its annual Business Outlook Survey, but it also notes several downward trends. People are apparently leaving the state in substantial numbers, as are many businesses, resulting in fewer jobs and less income statewide. The NJBIA offers possible explanations for why this is happening and what might be done about it. The state is also taking steps to evaluate the situation. A bill that recently passed the New Jersey Senate, which is now awaiting action in the Assembly, would direct the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development (LWD) to conduct detailed surveys of businesses that are leaving the state.

In 2007, the New Jersey Legislature enacted the Millville Dallas Airmotive Plant Job Loss Notification Act, also known as the NJ WARN Act. P.L.2007, c.212; N.J. Rev. Stat. § 34:21-1 et seq. The law applies to employers that have done business in the state for over three years and that have at least 100 full-time employees. Covered employers are required to provide a notice, in a specified form, to any employee who is terminated as part of a “mass layoff” or to all employees who lose their jobs as a result of a “transfer of operations” or “termination of operations.” Id. at § 34:21-2. The law also directs the LWD’s response team, whose purpose is to assist laid off employees, to offer to consult with the business’ management and workers.

While the NJBIA’s 2017 Business Outlook survey shows optimism among business owners, another study published in early 2016 shows significant rates of “outmigration” by both residents and businesses. From 2005 to 2014, the NJBIA estimates that more than two million people moved away from New Jersey, and this cost the state about $18 billion in net revenue. It further estimates that the state has lost about 75,000 jobs and $11.4 billion in “lost economic activity.” Despite these grim statistics, other measurements seem much more hopeful. Another organization, for example, reported that home sales in New Jersey have increased by more than 30 percent since early 2015.

Continue Reading

cube-game-cube-instantaneous-speed-568192Government contracts are a major source of revenue for many businesses, both large and small. In order to prevent corruption, and to avoid the appearance of corruption, Congress, state legislatures, and city councils have enacted laws addressing the overlap of government contracts and political contributions, often known as “pay-to-play” (PTP) laws. Businesses and business owners who rely on government contracts for some or all of their revenue must be careful to avoid even unintentional violations of these laws. A recent decision by the New Jersey Appellate Division, in which a single political contribution cost a business eligibility for government contracts, illustrates this concern. Della Pello Paving, Inc. v. N.J. Dept. of Treasury, et al, Nos. A-3774-15T3, A-3784-15T3, slip op. (N.J. App., Feb. 9, 2017).

Business activities covered by government contracts range from advertising campaigns in local markets to massive engineering operations. The associated fees can go from a few thousand to hundreds of millions of dollars. Any type of contract, and the processes of bidding and procurement, are covered by PTP and other anti-corruption laws. New Jersey’s PTP law was enacted in 2005 as an amendment to the Campaign Contributions and Expenditure Reporting Act. It seeks to address the “widespread cynicism” among the public caused by “[t]he growing infusion of funds donated by business entities into the political process at all levels of government.” N.J. Rev. Stat. § 19:44A-20.13.

The New Jersey PTP law bars anyone from eligibility for a contract worth more than $17,500 if they made political contributions in a state election within the previous eighteen months. It also bars eligibility for contracts of that size during the current or upcoming term of a governor or lieutenant governor for anyone who contributed to that person’s campaign or their party. Id. at § 19:44A-20.14. Business entities may avoid adverse consequences under this law by requesting “a full reimbursement” of any political contribution that would make them ineligible for a contract, provided they do so within thirty days of making the contribution. Id. at § 19:44A-20.20.
Continue Reading

stormtroopersIn closely held businesses, minority shareholders—generally meaning shareholders with less than 50 percent of the company’s voting shares—can easily find themselves at a disadvantage in disputes with majority shareholders. New Jersey’s Oppressed Shareholder Statute (OSS), N.J. Rev. Stat. § 14A:12-7 et seq., provides shareholders with a means to assert their rights when they suffer from bad-faith actions by other shareholders. They do not necessarily have to be in the minority to qualify as oppressed shareholders under the OSS, according to New Jersey courts. A recent decision illustrates how shareholders can benefit from this statute. RP v. SP, No. UNN-C-108-13, mem. op. (N.J. Super. Ct. Chanc. Div., Dec. 22, 2016).

Avoiding conflicts that lead to litigation is obviously the goal of any business owner. Still, it is useful to know which options are available should a company’s operating agreement fail to provide an adequate means for dealing with conflict. The OSS authorizes courts to intervene in a business for various reasons, with remedies ranging from the appointment of a custodian or provisional director to the dissolution of the business entity. If a corporation has no more than 25 shareholders, the OSS allows court intervention if “the directors or those in control…have acted oppressively or unfairly toward one or more minority shareholders in their capacities as shareholders, directors, officers, or employees.” N.J. Rev. Stat. § 14A:12-7(1)(c).

“Control,” in this context, refers to control of the corporation’s voting stock. A “minority shareholder” can include not only a shareholder with a minority of shares but also one who “does not have control of the corporate shares with respect to voting rights.” Berger v. Berger, 249 N.J. Super. 305, 317 (1991). A minority shareholder, under this definition, can also be an “oppressed shareholder” under the OSS, regardless of whether they actually own a minority of shares. Balsamides v. Perle, 313 N.J. Super. 7, 16 (1998).

Continue Reading