Tampilkan postingan dengan label partnership dissolution. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label partnership dissolution. Tampilkan semua postingan

Minggu, 06 September 2009

A partnership exit plan

If you've read this blog for some time, you know that I've written often about what happens when business partners can no longer get along. But other things can happen to break up a partnership that should also be considered when setting up a business venture. For example, what if one of you dies, becomes incapacitated, or suddenly is in a divorce that may cause your partner's share of the business to be owned by his ex-spouse?

Buy-sell agreements are integral to the start of a new venture, but a well-drafted one should cover not only what happens when it is time to end the partnership, but also what happens if the unexpected occurs. Some of the issues a good buy-sell should cover are:

1. A provision allowing for a buyout of a deceased partner's share of the business (often using the funds from life insurance policies paid for by the business).

2. A provision requiring a forced sell-out of a partner's interest if that partner is convicted of certain wrongdoing (such as felony criminal convictions) or, if he is in a profession, loses his license.

3. Contractual provisions that restrict the shares of a partner that pass unintentionally to a third party (such as through death or divorce), so that the surviving partner does not have to make partnership decisions with this new, unchosen partner.

A well-written buy-sell contract can help you envision and solve many of a partnership's long-term possible problems before the partnership ever gets off the ground. If you're in North Carolina, and need help setting up a venture or entity, feel free to contact me for an appointment.

Sabtu, 25 Oktober 2008

Partnerships -- an issue of trust

Partners in a partnership are said to owe "fiduciary duties" to one another--that is, they owe a duty each to the other to look out after the others' best interests.

Though partnerships are usually meant to be equal (i.e., equal sharing of responsibilities, equal contributions, etc.), they are, in practice, rarely so. Someone, for example, may handle the actual rental of rental properties in a partnership. Another, for example, may handle the bookkeeping and bank accounts of the company.

Regardless of all the plans that partners make, regardless of the legal mechanisms put into place to make the machinery run more smoothly, one thing any partnership needs to thrive is trust.

The past few weeks, I've been representing partners who desired to dissolve their partnership with a remaining partner. When the partners, who'd been friends, decided to wrap up their business, they asked the partner handling the bookkeeping to give everyone copies of the accounts just to reconcile things. This partner was offended, and told them he'd not give them anything, that they should trust him. Of course, then my clients also got their suspicions up, and claims began being thrown by each way.

At the end of the day, after threats of a judicial dissolution, the managing partner provided us the information we needed, and everything is going to be resolved without the need for a lawsuit. The sad thing is that--other than some very minor disagreements about the way certain things were handled--there appears to have been no dishonesty on either side, just a conflict of personalities.

If you're a partner--even if you believe you're doing the bulk of the work--remember that you owe duties to your other partners to be open, honest and forthcoming. Provide your partners with all information. Be upfront, don't be controlling and--most of all--don't get defensive when you're asked for information.

At the end of the day, these ex-partners will have resolved their partnership by splitting everything equally. But if one partner had simply been forthcoming, they could have done this without the added expense of attorney's fees

Minggu, 17 Agustus 2008

Common Reader Questions Regarding Partnership Disputes

I got some reader questions this week. While I normally don't respond (it's not that I don't want to help, but I don't like giving advice to someone whose laws may be different), I thought I could perhaps give general advice to situations like these.

I will caveat that my law license is limited to just North Carolina. However, I hope to give some general principles that can help:

"I just recently opened up a company but the amount of problems and arguments that I am having with my business partner is unbelievable. We are always arguing, during working hours she will just sit there going on about things that are not even necessary, wasting time and money and she will complain over the smallest thing. She has asked me to buy her out but she wants way more money than she actually put in to opening the company--which I am not agreeing to. The company has not even made that amount of money as yet so I don't know what to do. I can not work with the lady anymore ,its come to a stage where I don't even want to work myself but its my company so I am going to have to find a solution to this matter SO CAN I PLEASE GET SOME ADVICE ON WHAT TO DO?"

Unfortunately, your problem is one of the most common. You've not told me whether you are equal partners, or whether there is some unequal distribution of ownership. You've also not told me if your contributions were equal and in-kind (i.e., did you each put in the same amount of money? Or is she putting in money, and you're putting in sweat-equity?). Finally, you've not said if you have a written agreement (though I guess not).

Knowing so little about your situation, at least let me throw an idea your way that I talked about in my last blog: offer a buy/sell deal (see previous blog entry from July 26).

In other words: go to your partner, let her know that you appreciate things need to be resolved one way or another. Then make the offer I discussed in my last blog, and put the ball back in your partner's court.

1. Tell her that one partner should by the other out.
2. Tell her that you'll give her the choice: either you can set the value for the whole business, and then she can decide whether she wants to buy or sell at that value; or she can set the value, and you get to decide whether to buy or sell.

This works even if you're not equal partners (e.g., if you're 60/40, for example, the value would be set at the price for the whole company (assume your partner set value as $100,000), and then you'd decide whether to buy the partner out for $40,000, or sell to her for $60,000.

Here's the good thing that I gathered from your scenario: you're early on in this business relationship. What would be more difficult is if, three years from now, you were wildly successful (no thanks to your partner), and she wanted to be bought out--in essence, getting paid for the equity you created in the company. At this stage, however, you've not turned a profit yet. Also, you know she wants out. Most likely, if she has any sense, she'll let you choose the price of the company. Be sensible, and don't go too low, or she may buy you out. If, however, she wants to set the price of the company--then let her. After all, if she really does think it's worth so much, she may make you an offer that will financially reward you!

Hope this helps.

Here is one very similar:

"Hi Wesley.
A scenario for you:

My partner came up to me and said it would be a good idea to open a shop in
the area [certain medical equipment]. I agreed.

So I found the location, came up with the business name, discussed things
with real estate agents, distributers, employed staff etc etc.
My partner has done minimal work, much to my frustration.
Thus we have decided that one should buy the other out due to this and
we cant see eye to eye on decisions.
We have a lease for 18 months.
The shop isn't open yet and therefore no stock purchased.

We have put in $X each.

Does one just pay the other that $X back?

Do we get more than that from the other because I did more than my partner
or that it was his initial instigation not mine?
Does this count at all?

Do we just work out a number randomly?"

Ok, lots of good questions here. First, my usual disclaimer is that your jurisdiction (while another common law country) is not the same as mine, so remember that my free advice MAY be just worth what you've paid for it!

That being said, let me take care of the biggest question: since you're equal owners, unless your courts are different than ours, you'll be unlikely to get paid more for your share than your partner's. Sorry. The good news though, is, like the other reader, you didn't get too far into the relationship before realizing its inequalities.

I'm going to give you very similar advice to what I gave the other reader, with a few additional opening questions:

1. First, are you enjoying this business? I.e., would you want to continue it if you could buy your partner out?
2. Second, can you afford to continue the business?

It sounds to me as if, now that the ball is rolling, you'd like to try and make a go at it if you could.

3. Is it more likely that your partner would just like to be bought out and leave?

If so, offering your partner his initial start-up money might buy him out.

If you're not sure as to question number 3, then you might want to make your partner the offer I suggested to the first reader:

Offer them a buy/sell workout. One of you sets the price, the other gets to choose whether to buy or sell at that price. In my mind, the best thing in the world that could happen to you (or the reader above) is that your partner would want to set the price. In such situations, the partner (who truly wants to be bought out anyway), could set the price so high in their greed that you'd rather take a buyout, and start a new business.

But considering that your partner will be scared of this happening, he'll most likely ask you to make the price. Unfortunately, then, you've got a hard decision. Probably, in your mind there's one price you think HE should be bought out at (a low price), and a different price that YOU'D be content with being bought out at (the high price). The buy/sell price you make, will likely need to be somewhere in between.

The best advice I can give you for the price you set is not really legal advice--it's more practical. Set a price, and then make yourself comfortable--before offering it--that, come what may, you'll be happy with the results. Think of all the benefits you'll get if you can buy your partner out. But then think of the freedom you'll have if your partner buys you out and you go your own way (perhaps you can start your own business now, or take a regular job with shorter hours, etc.).

Finally, there is a legal consideration. As part of this buy/sell deal that I suggest you offer your client, you need to agree, as part of the deal (before either of you makes a decision), that the BUYING partner will take over the lease and all partnership obligations and indemnify the SELLING partner from any liability therefrom. Even better, if at all feasible, see if the landlord will be willing to release the SELLING partner from the lease's liability (I'd say chances are against it, but at least try).

It's only fair to the selling partner that he (or you) not have to worry about any partnership liabilities creeping back in the next 18 months.

For both of the individuals above, I'd suggest that if your disgruntled partner takes you up on the offer, that you then hire a qualified attorney/solicitor to draw up the paperwork. I'll be happy to recommend someone in your area if you desire. And please, let me know how things turn out!

Sabtu, 26 Juli 2008

The easiest and fairest way to resolve a partnership dispute

If you read my posts regularly, you know that in my business practice I run across business ventures in which--for whatever reason--the owners no longer have the same goals. Sometimes, they outright dislike each other, in others, they simply want to do different things. Sometimes these differences involve LLCs, corporations or true partnerships (and here, I'll refer generically to the co-owners as "partners").

Hopefully, a good organizational agreement will provide for a way to resolve these disputes between partners, but, as you have seen in previous posts, they don't always.

What I'm going to provide you today is the easiest, fairest, most common sense way to resolve a dispute between two partners over the direction of the business. First, however, a few caveats:

1. You'll need to have your finances in order.
2. You'll need to understand the possible ramifications that will result from this method.
3. You'll need to prepare yourself to be satisifed with whichever result occurs.

Those warnings are cryptic, aren't they?

Here it is, then: If you and you partner are at odds, or are wanting to go in different directions and can't resolve your differences, meet with your partner, and make him this offer (and for this example, I'm assuming two partners who are equal owners).

1. You think that the partnership between the two of you is going in different directions.
2. The best thing for everyone is if one partner buys the other one out.
3. One partner should set a value for the business (i.e., what that partner thinks the partnership, or at least his half of it, is worth).
4. The other partner then gets to decide whether to sell at that price, or to buy at that price.
5. You give him the option to decide whether he wants to set the price, or whether he'd rather decide whether to buy or sell.
6. You wait.

Think about how absolutely, finally, quickly and fairly this can effect a business buyout and a resolution of the dispute--whether you're running a lucrative partnership or one that is barely struggling along.

I was involved with a buyout, recently, where this occurred. One partner decided to make this offer to the other. Before he made the offer, he searched his soul, and made a decision at what value he'd place on a partnership interest. Then he determined that he'd be happy either way--if he got bought at for that price, he could live with it, or if he was asked to buy the partner out at that price, he'd live with it.

He then approached his partner, and made the suggestion for a buy/sell. The other partner agreed. Now, think about how easy things become at this point: My client had already decided his value point. If the other partner decided to set the value, my client could make his buy/sell decision in about 30 seconds, simply based on whether the offer was higher or lower than my client's buy/sell point he had already mentally set.

Or if (as was the case in this instance) the partner asked my client to set the price, my client could offer the price he'd already decided, and then sit back and wait for the partner to make the decision of whether to buy or to be bought out.

The two hardest parts about this mechanism are (1) coming up with a value that you can live with whether you buy or sell and (2) convincing the other partner to do this (for example, perhaps the other partner would only want to sell, or would only want to buy, etc.). But once the other partner agrees to this mechanism, the buyout will be fair.

In my client's case, if his partner had thought the price offered was too low, then the partner had the right to buy my client out at that low price. If he thought the price was unrealistically high, then he could sell out to my client at that price. Conversely, my client had to be realistic about the price. Perhaps he would've liked to have sold for a higher price, or to have bought out his partner for a lower price, but since he did not know which choice his partner would make, he had to make a price that he could live with either way.

If you have any more questions about partnership issues in North Carolina, feel free to schedule an appointment at 704-735-0483.

Selasa, 08 Mei 2007

Partnership and Corporate Disputes -- Final Settlement

I've been writing lately about different clients who've found themselves in disputes with their small business partners or co-owners. This week I settled one case, involving a man who'd owned both a corporation and a partnership with one other co-owner. Although emotions ran high between the two former friends, and they'll likely not be on speaking terms for a long time, the actual dissolution process was fairly tame and was resolved without going to court. Looking back on it, there are a few lessons to be drawn from this experience.


1. Put your agreements in writing. Although both gentlemen were the type who liked to do business on a handshake, they'd had the sense, 20 years ago, to put their business agreement in writing. When things between them went sour, and they started rattling their swords at one another, at the end of the day their resolution of the conflict was governed by the written documents that had been drafted two decades earlier. Had the two men operated on simply a handshake, as is quite often the case, I believe my client would likely have been simply shut out of the company and would have had no recourse to protect himself other than go to court.

2. Look at the balance of power. One thing my client, in retrospect, would have done differently is to have put more thought into the balance of power. The two gentlemen were each 50 percent owners, so the opposing party was agreed upon as President, and my client was the Vice President. They created, however, a three-person board, made up of my client, the opposing party, and the opposing party's wife. When things went bad, my client was, to a certain extent, shut out of decisions because his partner and partner's wife constituted a majority of the board of directors. If he had it to do over, I think he'd rather have appointed an independent third party (such as an accountant) as the tie-breaking director.

3. Know your rights. When things between my client and his partner first went south, his partner threatened to just push him out of the business. My client, quite frankly, was scared that he could simply be pushed out of the business. However, he came to an attorney specializing in business matters. We reviewed his business agreement as well as the applicable law, and I was able to advise him of both the strengths and weaknesses of his position. My client learned, for example, that if he and his partner could not agree, the worst thing that could happen is that the business could be judicially dissolved and the assets divided (or sold and the proceeds divided) between the two of them. On the other hand, he also learned that if the corporation and partnership were judicially dissolved, it would involve high court costs and would likely not bring the full value of the property. Armed with this knowledge, my client was able to go into negotiations with a certain degree of confidence, yet also knew that he needed to work together with his former partner so that they both could come out better.

If you have questions about a partnership or corporate dissolution, contact me at wldeaton@vnet.net.