Law Office Of Paul DePetris
paul@newjerseylemon.com

Experienced New Jersey Business Lawsuit Attorney

NEW JERSEY BUSINESS LAWSUIT HELP FROM AN EXPERIENCED NEW JERSEY BUSINESS LAWSUIT ATTORNEY
If your business is involved in a business to business lawsuit – whether with a business purchaser or vendor - or if your business is involved in a lawsuit between your business and a consumer, consider the services of an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney – an attorney who has significant experience handling New Jersey business litigation cases.   Get the New Jersey business lawsuit help you need.


WHAT IS A NEW JERSEY BUSINESS LAWSUIT?
A New Jersey business litigation case is a disagreement between two businesses.  It can be about any of the following:


a breach of an oral or written business contract for the sale of goods or services entered into between Businesses


consumer fraud or New Jersey common law fraud committed by one Business against another Business involving the sale of goods or services


allegations of unfair interference with a Business, such as where a Business uses unfair methods to compete with its competitor 


allegations of abuse of process or malicious prosecution, such as where one Business is owed money from another Business and files a criminal complaint against a president or other officer of the Business that owes the money


efforts to enforce a New Jersey noncompete clause or New Jersey restrictive covenant that was entered into between businesses or between a Business and one of its former employees or independent contractors.


Special Civil Part collections of past due bills owed by one Business to another Business.


New Jersey fraudulent transfers of money or property by a Business that seeks to avoid paying a Special Civil judgment entered against it.


New Jersey franchise disputes, where a New Jersey franchise purchaser and the seller of the New Jersey franchise have a dispute about duties arising under the franchise agreement.


Special Civil disputes between Business partners or stockholders of a Business for control of the Business partnership or corporation or about decisions affecting the business.


New Jersey business lawsuit help does not always have to be expensive.  Consider help from an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.


EXPERIENCE PROSECUTING AND DEFENDING NEW JERSEY BUSINESS LAWSUITS AND HANDLING NEW JERSEY COMMERCIAL LITIGATION FILES
Is your business involved in a business lawsuit and in need of New Jersey business lawsuit help from a New Jersey business lawsuit attorney? If you are a business involved in a New Jersey business litigation case, consider the services of an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.  Paul DePetris has worked on a variety of New Jersey business litigation cases, including commercial cases involving:
New Jersey Assignments Of Business Assets And Business Liabilities
New Jersey Breach Of Contract Lawsuits
New Jersey Breach Of Duty Of Loyalty Lawsuits
New Jersey Breach Of Fiduciary Duty Lawsuits
New Jersey Breach Of Warranty Lawsuits
New Jersey Business Sale Agreement Disputes
New Jersey Commercial Debt Lawsuits
New Jersey Corporate Mismanagement Lawsuits
New Jersey Corporate Veil Doctrine Disputes
New Jersey Employment Contract Lawsuits
New Jersey Indemnification Contract Lawsuits
New Jersey Injunctive Relief Lawsuits
New Jersey Mechanics Liens
New Jersey Noncompete Agreement Lawsuits And New Jersey Restrictive Covenant Lawsuits
New Jersey Orders To Show Cause 
New Jersey Real Estate Lawsuits
New Jersey Tortuous Interference With Business Relationships
New Jersey Shareholder Oppression


Paul DePetris has helped prosecute or defend New Jersey business lawsuits for the following types of businesses:


Automotive finance companies
Automotive dealerships (New and used)
Automotive repair shops
Automotive Towing Companies
Banks
Automotive junkyard dealerships
Car dealerships
Commercial landlords
Commercial tenants
Construction contractors
Construction subcontractors
Credit Card companies
Educational institutions 
Gas stations
General construction contractors
Home improvement contractors
Home inspectors
Home repair contractors
Marinas
Plumbers
Real estate agents
Real estate brokers
Restaurant owners and partners
Termite inspectors
Title companies


Whether your business is prosecuting or defending a New Jersey business litigation case, consider New Jersey business lawsuit help from an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.  Read below to find out more about the services offered by Mr. DePetris.


CAN A CORPORATE OFFICER BE PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CORPORATE MISCONDUCT?
In some situations, a Corporate officer may be held liable for the New Jersey corporation’s wrongdoing.  This process of holding a Corporate officer liable for the New Jersey corporation’s conduct is called piercing the Corporate veil.  A corporation typically acts only through its agents.   New Jersey generally adheres to the basic concept of a corporation being an entity in business agreement law separate and apart from the person or persons who own its stock.    The main reason for incorporation is the insulation of shareholders from the liabilities of the Corporate enterprise.   Generally speaking, the Plaintiff or Defendant seeking to pierce the Corporate veil bears the burden of proving that the Court should disregard the Corporate entity and hold the Corporate officer personally liable.  The sanction of piercing the Corporate veil is a severe one.  For, Corporate veil piercing is an equitable remedy whereby the protections of corporate formation are lost.  Corporate veil piercing is normally reserved for situations where it is necessary to remedy the fundamental unfairness that shall result from a failure to disregard the Corporate form.  Generally speaking, while there are exceptions to the rule, unless there is a credible showing of fraud or injustice, courts will not pierce the Corporate veil to impose liability on the Corporate principals.  Normally, Courts reserve the application of the remedy of piercing the Corporate veil to situations where Corporate officers have a practical and realistic opportunity to avoid injurious consequences of corporate conduct in areas of public health and safety.  Where the New Jersey business litigation case merely pertains to an alleged Breach of business agreement between New Jersey businesses and where the Business has reason to know that they are dealing with a Corporate entity and where that corporation allegedly executes the Business agreement that is the subject of a dispute between the Plaintiffs and Defendants, the Corporate veil should normally remain intact.    In some New Jersey cases, a Corporate officer is not even required to come forward unbidden with information bearing on the New Jersey corporation’s ability to meet its obligations.  If a Plaintiff or Defendant is concerned about a New Jersey corporation’s ability to meet its obligations, there are a variety of ways for the concerned Plaintiff or Defendant to try to protect itself other than holding a Corporate officer personally liable on the obligation.    Reasons supporting a piercing of the Corporate veil might include evidence that the New Jersey corporation’s officers failed to observe corporate formalities, such as by using corporate funds only for their intended purpose, maintaining corporate records, filing annual reports, holding shareholders' meetings, paying dividends and employing officers and directors. 


WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN ENFORCEABLE BUSINESS AGREEMENT?
Since, a Breach of business agreement is never presumed; rather, the burden of establishing a Breach of business agreement rests with the Plaintiff or Defendant asserting the Breach.   A Business agreement is an exchange of promises and thus is the result of a “bargain,” an “exchange of equivalents.”   An enforceable bilateral Business agreement requires an offer, an acceptance, consideration and a meeting of the minds upon all the essential terms of the Business agreement.    To have a valid Business agreement, there must be a meeting of the minds, as a Business agreement does not come into being unless the Plaintiffs and Defendants agree to the same terms.   Thus, an enforceable agreement only results from the Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ agreeing upon essential terms and manifesting an intention to be bound by those terms and where the Plaintiffs and Defendants do not agree to one or more essential terms, the Business agreement may be unenforceable.   Indeed, it is fundamental that the essential element to the valid consummation of a Business agreement is a meeting of the minds of the Business agreement Plaintiffs or Defendants.  Thus, doubt or difference between the Plaintiffs and Defendants to an alleged agreement is normally incompatible with the New Jersey business lawsuit that the Plaintiffs and Defendants agreement to terms.   If the contemplated agreement is to be bilateral, the offeror and offeree alike must express agreement as to every term of the Business agreement.  The offerror does this in the offer; the offeree must do it in his acceptance.  When interpreting a Business agreement, it is not the real intent that controls but rather the intent expressed or apparent in the writing.  Further, normally it is not the Court’s role to make a new agreement or to supply any material stipulations or conditions which contravene the Business agreements of the Plaintiffs and Defendants.   The mere fact that a Business agreement is somewhat harsh or unfair in its operation does not excuse the performance of same and the Court cannot create obligations that are not based on the expressed intention of the Plaintiffs and Defendants.   Indeed, the Court will not normally rewrite the Business agreement to provide the protection which a Plaintiff or Defendant failed to obtain for themselves.   Instead, the judicial function of the Court is normally to enforce the Business agreement as it is written.    Moreover, where the Plaintiffs and Defendants are experienced businesspeople, courts generally should not tinker with a finely drawn and precise agreement entered into by experienced business people that regulates their financial affairs.   Also, equitable relief is not normally available merely because enforcement of the Business agreement causes hardship to one of the Plaintiffs and Defendants.     Thus, if a Business agreement contains ambiguous or doubtful terms, the Business agreement is generally construed against its drafter.   The interpretation of a Business agreement is often a legal question for the Court rather than for a jury.


WHAT IS THE IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING?
Business agreement law implies a requirement that the businesses involved in a Business agreement must act in good faith and deal fairly with the other New Jersey business in performing or enforcing the terms of the Business agreement.  This implied agreement is part of the Business agreement, just as though the Business agreement expressly states this good faith and fair dealing require¬ment.  To act in good faith and deal fairly, Plaintiffs or Defendants must act honestly toward one another when performing or enforcing the Business agreement.  One Plaintiff or Defendant to the Business agreement cannot do anything that will have the effect of destroying or injuring another Plaintiff or Defendant’s right to receive the fruits of the Business agreement.  However, if an enforceable agreement never existed between the Plaintiffs and Defendants a claim for violation of the noncompete agreement or the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, such a claim would normally fail.   For, in the absence of a Business agreement, there can be no breach of a implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.  


ARE ORAL AGREEMENTS ENFORCEABLE IN COURT?
An oral agreement for goods or services between businesses may be enforceable in court, especially if there is proof that the terms of the Business agreement were sufficiently definite and that the Plaintiffs and Defendants agreed to be bound to the oral agreement.  While there does exist a statute of frauds in New Jersey that requires that certain agreements be in writing, in certain situations, it can be overcome.


DEFENDING BUSINESSES BEING SUED FOR DEBTS
Does your New Jersey business lawsuit involved getting sued for a bill that your business does not agree it owes?  Being charged for defective merchandise?  Having a dispute with one of your vendors?  If you are involved in a New Jersey business lawsuit involving the collection of a debt against your business, consider the services of an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.   Paul DePetris has defended many types of businesses in a variety of debt collection cases.  New Jersey business lawsuit help may only be a phone call away.
 
NEW JERSEY BUSINESS LAWSUIT DEBT COLLECTION CASES
Letting receivables go uncollected?  Having trouble getting your customers to pay their bills?  Did you deliver merchandise to a customer but they will not pay the bill for the merchandise or return it to you?  If your New Jersey business lawsuit involves collecting a commercial debt in New Jersey, consider the services of an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.   Paul DePetris has prosecuted many types of New Jersey businesses in a variety of New Jersey debt collection cases.  


NEW JERSEY UNFAIR COMPETITION BUSINESS LITIGATION CASES 
Does your Business lawsuit involve a business interfering with relationships with other customers?   Did your Business enter into a franchise agreement and is having problems with the seller of the franchise?  Is a customer giving you problems or wrongfully claiming that you cheated them or committed consumer fraud?   Did a person or Business breach a fiduciary duty or duty of loyalty owed to your Business?   Is another Business tortuously interfering with your Business operations or client base?  Do you have to defend a New Jersey consumer lawsuit or New Jersey commercial lawsuit?  Did a New Jersey employee breach an employment agreement?  Consider the services of an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.   Paul DePetris has defended many types of Businesses in a variety of New Jersey business litigation cases.


COLLECTION OF UNPAID COMMISSIONS IN NEW JERSEY 
Is your Business owed commissions and cannot get paid?  Did someone try to cheat you out of your commission?  If you are a real estate broker, real estate agent or salesperson who is owed a commission, consider the services of an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.  Paul DePetris has handled New Jersey business litigation cases involving New Jersey real estate brokers, New Jersey real estate agents and New Jersey salespeople, including commission disputes.  Consider New Jersey business lawsuit help from an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.


NEW JERSEY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CASES
Do you believe your Business is entitled to stop another Business from selling certain products or services or that your Business is entitled to stop methods of unfair competition by a competitor?  Does your Business want to try to immediately stop a competitor or former employee from engaging in unfair conduct?   Consider the services of an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.   Paul DePetris has defended many types of businesses in a variety of New Jersey business litigation cases and has provided New Jersey business lawsuit help to businesses and law firms involved in New Jersey business litigation cases.


NEW JERSEY BUSINESS INSURANCE DISPUTES
Did an insurance company refuse to pay a claim your New Jersey business made, fail to cover a loss or fail to defend you in a case?  If your business is involved in a first party bad faith insurance dispute or a third party bad faith insurance dispute, Consider the services of an experienced New Jersey business lawsuit attorney.   Paul DePetris has defended many types of businesses in a variety of New Jersey business litigation cases.   Get New Jersey business lawsuit help for your business dispute.


WHAT IS A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT?
A Restrictive covenant is a provision in a Business agreement that prohibits or limits a Plaintiff or Defendant from taking certain actions.  Post employment Restrictive covenants and Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clauses are not void per se in New Jersey.


ARE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS AND NONCOMPETE AGREEMENT OR NONCOMPETE CLAUSES ENFORECEABLE IN COURT?
The enforceability of Restrictive covenants depends in large part upon their reasonableness under the particular circumstances.   Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clauses are looked upon unfavorably by the Courts, as potential restraints on trade.   To be enforceable, a Restrictive covenant must be reasonable under the circumstances in the Breach of business agreement case before the Court.  A Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clause will be totally or partially enforced by Court to the extent reasonably necessary to protect the Employer’s legitimate interests if enforcement of the Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clause will cause no undue hardship on the Employee and will not impair the public interest.  The New Jersey Supreme Court set forth the following four pronged test for determining the reasonableness of Restrictive covenants (often referred to by commentators as a three pronged test insofar as they omit the first prong):
The Employer has a protectable interest.
The Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clause must be no more restrictive than is necessary to protect the “legitimate interests of the Employer.
The Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clause must impose “no undue hardship on the employee.
The Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clause must not be “injurious to the public interest.”


To be enforceable, the Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clause must generally meet all 4 of the aforesaid requirements.   Moreover, the Court may seek evidence that the Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clause is based on adequate consideration. Usually, the issue of whether the Noncompete agreement or Noncompete clause is enforceable amounts to a fact sensitive test, since the validity and enforceability of a Business agreement against competition is fact-sensitive and must be determined in light of the facts of the Breach of business agreement case.  In one case, the Court enforced a post-employment Restrictive covenant where the prohibition was reasonably necessary for the protection of the New Jersey business of the Employer, was not unreasonably restrictive in point of time or territory upon the rights of the employee and was not prejudicial to the public interests.   Since, a Breach of business agreement is never presumed; rather, the burden of establishing a Breach of business agreement rests with the Plaintiff or Defendant asserting the Breach.   In appropriate cases, a Chancery court shall intervene, providing injunctive relief to prevent the Breach of noncompete agreement or Noncompete clauses and solicitation of an employer’s personnel and customers and shall enjoin a Employee for the use or disclosure of trade secrets or confidential information acquired from a former Employer.    However, where there is no express Business agreement between a Employer and Employee, absent a showing of fraud or breach of trust, the Court shall generally not enjoin a Employee, after termination of his employment, from honest competition with the former employer, even to the extent of soliciting the former employer’s customers.    Indeed, unless a Employee is restrained by an enforceable Business agreement not to compete, he or she usually may freely compete with a former Employer by accepting employment with a rival or by undertaking his or her own competing New Jersey business.   In this regard, a Employee who is not otherwise bound by a Restrictive covenant may, after termination of employment, and in the absence of any breach of trust, compete honestly with his or her former employer.  Accordingly, in such circumstances, neither the decision to compete nor the entering into competition is actionable.  In addition, it is not the Court’s function to make a Business agreement for the Plaintiffs and Defendants or to supply terms not previously agreed upon.  The Court shall not normally relieve a Plaintiff or Defendant from the hardship they might have guarded against and thus, the Court shall enforce the Business agreement which the Plaintiffs and Defendants themselves made.  The Court will not generally rewrite the Business agreement to provide the protection which a Plaintiff or Defendant failed to obtain for themselves.  For, it is not the function of the Court to make a better agreement for the Plaintiffs and Defendants or to supply terms not previously agreed upon.  If a Business agreement’s terms are clear, the Court must merely enforce them as written.  Accordingly, where a New Jersey written agreement is complete and unambiguous on its face, the Plaintiffs and Defendants are bound by the intentions they express in same.  Moreover, where a New Jersey written agreement contains ambiguous or doubtful terms, the Business agreement is construed against its drafter.  


Moreover, the common law New Jersey duty of loyalty does not itself necessarily preclude a Employee from making arrangements to commence new employment with a competitor.  The key distinction between such arrangements and competition is usually that a Employee cannot directly compete with the current employer until after employment with that employee terminates.  Whether a Employee's conduct constitutes unfair competition or was merely preparatory to new employment is a matter of degree and depends upon the facts and circumstances of the Breach of business agreement case.  


However, Courts have held that the enforcement of Restrictive covenants does not depend on the existence of a New Jersey written agreement of employment for such Business agreements need not be in writing but may be evidenced by conduct rather than words.   A Business agreement of employment may be express or implied.   A Employment agreement does not require formality. While assent to the offer of employment "must be manifested in order to be legally effective, it need not be expressed in words."  The necessary assent may be expressed in words, or it may be "implied from conduct without words."  One could however argue that, while the Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ Employment agreement itself need not be in writing, to satisfy the requirements of a valid Restrictive covenant, the Restrictive covenant itself must be in writing.


WHAT DAMAGES ARE AVAILABLE FOR A BREACH OF BUISINESS AGREEMENT LAWSUIT?
Where a Plaintiff and a Defendant have made a Business agreement, which one of them has broken, the damages which the other Plaintiff or Defendant ought to receive, in respect of such a Breach, should be such as may fairly be considered either arising naturally, i.e., according to the usual course of things, from such a Breach of business agreement itself, or such as may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of both the Plaintiff and Defendant at the time they made the Business agreement, as the probable result of the Breach of it.  Agreement damages are generally designed to put the injured Plaintiff or Defendant in as good a position as if the Business agreement had been performed.    For example, in a lease transaction, the lessee is generally entitled to recover the value of the lease term, which, in the absence of special circumstances, is the difference between the actual rental value and the rent reserved.    A Plaintiff or Defendant is not generally chargeable for a Business agreement loss that the Plaintiff or Defendant had no reason to foresee as a probable result of the alleged Breach when the Business agreement was made.   Further, the loss must be a reasonably certain consequence of the Breach.  


CAN ONE NEW JERSEY BUSINESS FORCE ANOTHER NEW JERSEY BUSINESS TO PERFORM OBLIGATIONS UNDER A BUSINESS AGREEMENT (NEW JERSEY SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE)?
New Jersey specific performance is an equitable remedy available to a Plaintiff or Defendant to a New Jersey lawsuit if they can establish that mere legal relief such as an award of damages would be insufficient to make the Business whole.  Under the doctrine of New Jersey specific performance, the Court orders a Plaintiff or Defendant guilty of a Breach of business agreement to, under the danger of court penalties, perform under the Business agreement or if they already began to perform and stopped, to complete performance under the Business agreement.   To establish a right to the New Jersey remedy of New Jersey specific performance, a New Jersey business must demonstrate that the Business agreement in question is valid and enforceable at law, that the terms of the Business agreement are expressed in such fashion that the Court can determine, with reasonable certainty, the duties of a Plaintiff and a Defendant and the conditions under which performance is due and that an order compelling performance of the Business agreement will not be harsh or oppressive.   The right to New Jersey specific performance turns not only on whether the Business has demonstrated a right to legal relief but also whether the performance of the Business agreement represents an equitable result.   The New Jersey remedy of New Jersey specific performance is in the Court’s discretion to grant or deny.   When New Jersey specific performance is sought, the Court is required to do more than merely determine whether the Business agreement is valid and enforceable; the Court of equity must also appraise the respective conduct and situation of the Plaintiffs and Defendants, the clarity of the Business agreement itself notwithstanding that it may be legally enforceable and the impact that an order of New Jersey specific performance could have (i.e., whether such an order is harsh or oppressive to the wrongdoer or whether a denial of New Jersey specific performance leaves the Business with an adequate remedy).   In addition, the Plaintiff or Defendant seeking New Jersey specific performance must stand in conscientious relation to his adversary – that Plaintiff or Defendant’s conduct in the matter must have been fair, just and equitable rather than sharp or aiming at unfair advantage.  Such weighing of equitable considerations must represent, in each New Jersey case, a conscious attempt on the Court’s part to render complete justice to both the Plaintiff and Defendant regarding their agreementual relationship.  The Court will often direct performance of such a Business agreement because, when there is no excuse for the failure to perform, Business agreement law of equity regards and treats as done what in good conscience ought to be done.  However, New Jersey specific performance of a Business agreement will not be awarded where the Business agreement is incomplete, uncertain or too indefinite in its material terms to be specifically enforced in equity.  


NEED HELP WITH YOUR NEW JERSEY BUSINESS LITIGATION CASE?
Handling your New Jersey business litigation case wrong from the beginning may only cost you more money and time in the end!!  Do it right the first time by seeking legal advice from a competent New Jersey business lawsuit attorney!   Let the Law Office of Paul DePetris help you with your New Jersey business litigation case.  Not all New Jersey business litigation cases require you to pay expensive legal fees to get New Jersey business lawsuit help.  
Website Builder