A recent decision by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin highlights the need for developers and property owners to be clear and precise in drafting restrictive covenants. Richard Forshee v. Lee Neuschwander, Docket Number 2016AP1608, illustrates that even the state’s highest court can have difficulty in understanding and applying owner intent. The...
By Michael Van Someren & Danielle Snyder Fadel Regulation D quietly changed in 2015 and few noticed. Though many real estate developers, owners, business owners, and private equity funds are generally familiar with “private placements” under Regulation D and the limitations of such private placements, a few key advantages are often...
On May 10, 2018, the Wisconsin Supreme Court released a game changing decision in McNally v. Capital Cartage, Inc., 2018 WI 46 impacting the potential commission for real estate brokers as well as the obligations of brokers and sellers. The Court held that a substantial variance between a full price offer and the listing contract can be declared...
By Michael Van Someren & Joseph E. Tierney IV Under state and federal securities laws, owners and managers of companies raising capital through sale securities (e.g., stock or membership interests in companies) can be personally liable for material misrepresentations and omissions in any description of the business or investment. To reduce...
By Thomas V. Rohan Early in my legal career, I did a considerable amount of commercial collection work. Some of the more routinely contested cases involved service contracts with automatic renewal clauses, that is, provisions that resulted in a contract being renewed for a new term, sometimes for as long as five years, if the customer did not...
By Michael Van Someren & Joseph E. Tierney, IV When a real estate transaction closes in Wisconsin there is a transfer fee that must be paid to the State of Wisconsin which is equal to 0.3% of the purchase price. Additionally, the sale price is factored into the assessed value of the real estate. Unfortunately, this often means that after...
By Ryan M. Spott & Michael Van Someren If your business provides goods/services to governmental agencies, construction or other projects that have some sort of governmental financing (e.g., loans from state, county or municipal bodies), or is part of a supply chain for contractors that fall into such categories, you may qualify for the...
By James E. Braza Part 6: Miscellaneous Additional Changes to A201. As final article of the series, Part 6 covers certain miscellaneous, but nonetheless, important changes in the A201 document which did not fit in the categories covered in Parts 1-5. Contractor’s Construction Schedule. The revised Section...
By James E. Braza Part 5: Revisions to the B101 Owner/Architect Agreement. The changes in B101 dovetail with other newly-modified documents, such as the A201 General Conditions, and this article should be read in conjunction with Parts 1-4 of the series. Architect Compensation. Numerous changes have been made in the various sections of the...
By James E. Braza Part 4: A201 and Related Documents: Insurance and Bonding Provisions. The Lay of the Land. The most significant changes brought about by the 2017 modifications are those related to the insurance and bonding. The modifications are sweeping, both in form and in substance. From a form standpoint, the documents look very different....
