• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
MacElree Harvey, Ltd.

MacElree Harvey, Ltd.

Initiative in Practice

  • Home
  • Legal Services
        • Banking & Finance Law
        • Business & Corporate Law
        • Criminal Defense
        • Employment Law
        • Estates & Trusts Law
        • Family Law
        • Litigation Law
        • Mediation and Arbitration
        • Personal Injury Law
        • Real Estate & Land Use Law
        • Tax Law
  • Our Team
        • Joseph A. Bellinghieri
        • Patrick J. Boyer
        • Jeffrey P. Burke
        • Robert A. Burke
        • Matthew C. Cooper
        • John C. Cronin
        • Daniel T. Crossland
        • Marie I. Crossley
        • Harry J. DiDonato
        • Jaycie DiNardo
        • Caroline G. Donato
        • Lindsay A. Dunn
        • Sally A. Farrell
        • Brian J. Forgue
        • William J. Gallagher
        • Patrick J. Gallo, Jr.
        • Mary Kay Gaver
        • J. Charles Gerbron, Jr.
        • Leo M. Gibbons
        • Joseph P. Green, Jr.
        • Carolina Heinle
        • Court Heinle
        • Frank W. Hosking III
        • Katherine A. Isard
        • J. Kurtis Kline
        • Elias A. Kohn
        • Peter E. Kratsa
        • Mary E. Lawrence
        • Daniel R. Losco
        • Michael G. Louis
        • Jamison C. MacMain
        • John F. McKenna
        • Matthew M. McKeon
        • Brian L. Nagle
        • Lance J. Nelson
        • Timothy F. Rayne
        • Michael C. Rovito
        • Duke Schneider
        • Tiffany M. Shrenk
        • Andrew R. Silverman
        • Ashley B. Stitzer
        • Robert M. Tucker
        • Natalie R. Young
  • About Us
    • Our History
    • Our Approach
    • Social Responsibility
    • Testimonials
  • Careers
  • News & Updates
    • Articles by Our Attorneys
    • News
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
    • Newsletters
  • Offices
    • Centreville, DE
    • Hockessin, DE
    • Kennett Square, PA
    • West Chester, PA
  • Contact
  • (610) 436-0100

Uncategorized

Commercial Contracts: Pitfalls of Boilerplate Clauses

November 18, 2024 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

By: Robert A. Burke

The use of boilerplate in commercial transactions can be a simple way for contracting parties to close business deals. However, the risks of using boilerplate provisions are exposed when disputes arise. This article addresses some of the more troubling provisions that find their way into standard commercial contracts.

We will touch on the following provisions:

  • Recitals
  • Governing Law
  • Dispute Resolution (Mediation/Arbitration)
  • Indemnification
  • Liquidated Damages
  • Merger Clauses

Recitals

Recitals are often used by parties to help identify the purpose of the agreement, the identity of the parties, and the reasons the parties have decided to enter into the agreement. Recitals can also be useful for explaining a complicated factual scenario that led to the contract.

A cautionary note on recitals: the parties need to determine if the recital will be part of the contract. There are two issues to identify here.

First, if the recital isn’t important enough to be specifically incorporated into the agreement, then why have it in the agreement?

Second, it’s typically wise to have the recital be part of the contract (and expressly state that it is part of the contract). This will make sure that the recital is admissible in interpreting the contract’s substantive provisions. This could also assure that the parties remove superfluous language.

Finally, a typical recital is the “statement of consideration”. The statement of consideration is not necessarily direct evidence that the agreement is supported by adequate consideration. However, if this language is in the agreement, most courts will recognize that there is a presumption that the agreement is supported by adequate consideration. Keep in mind, this presumption can be rebutted, and the contract could be deemed unenforceable for lack of consideration.

Governing Law

A choice of law provision is usually appropriate to include in most business transactions.  Without a valid choice of law provision, the courts will be left to determine the law of the state with the most significant relationship that will govern the enforcement of the agreement.

There is also a cautionary note on the use of choice of law provisions.  Namely, the chosen law is usually the state where the drafter’s office is located.  This is done without any regard for what impact the state’s law will have on the agreement.  Best practices dictate that you research the chosen jurisdiction’s laws before you include the provision.  If you have no idea why you are applying your state’s choice of law, don’t put it in the contract.

Dispute Resolution: Mediation and Arbitration

Dispute resolution provisions are an important part of any business transaction.  It’s prudent for the parties to decide at the start of a transaction what will happen if the transaction goes sour. The parties are free to provide for the adjudication of future disputes by inserting mandatory mediation and/or arbitration provisions in their agreements.

The American Arbitration Association, one of the larger dispute resolution organizations, has a number of draft provisions that can be used.  For example:

Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this contract, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration administered by the American Arbitration Association under its Commercial Arbitration Rules, and judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrators (s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof.

This provision covers many of the necessary elements of an arbitration clause:

  • Any claim is covered by mandatory arbitration;
  • It identifies the entity that is going to administer the arbitration;
  • It describes the rules under which the arbitration will be decided; and
  • It recognizes that any judgment arising out of the arbitration proceeding will be enforceable in a court.

The parties need to ascertain whether arbitration is the appropriate remedy for any dispute. This depends on the identity of the parties and the nature of the agreement.  Additionally, while it is presumed that arbitration is less expensive, this is not always the case. The parties typically will share in the cost of the arbitrator. In this regard, it’s not unusual for an arbitration clause to contain a provision that there will be a panel of three arbitrators. Having three arbitrators adjudicate a dispute is extraordinarily expensive and often cumbersome.

Additionally, there is no meaningful opportunity to appeal an arbitration award. An arbitration award will only be overturned if there is some sort of egregious unfairness in the arbitration process. The standard typically applied involves “fraud or corruption” (depending on the jurisdiction). It’s not enough if the arbitrator made evidentiary errors, incorrectly determined the facts or improperly applied the law. While there is finality in this result (and the avoidance of suffering through the costs and time delays of litigation in court) there is effectively little accountability for the arbitrator.

Before selecting an arbitration organization to administer any disputes, it’s important to understand the rules that the arbitrator will apply. The AAA is just one of many organizations in this country that will administer arbitration disputes. There are other organizations, as well, that administer arbitration disputes.

To the extent you’re going to have an arbitration provision in your agreement, it is useful to set forth the place that the arbitration will occur. This is especially important if the parties are from different jurisdictions.

Indemnification

A standard indemnification provision can provide for recognition of the parties’ obligations to compensate the other party for certain costs and expenses.

A standard indemnification provision can read as follows:

[Buyer/Seller/Mutual] Indemnification. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, [Buyer/Seller/each party] (“Indemnified Party”) shall indemnify, [hold harmless,] and defend [Seller/Buyer/the other party] and its officers, directors, employees, agents, affiliates, successors and permitted assigns (collectively, “Indemnified Party”) against any and all losses, damages, liabilities, deficiencies, claims, actions, judgments, settlements, interest, awards, penalties, fines, costs, or expenses of whatever kind, including [reasonable] attorneys’ fees, that are [incurred by Indemnified Party/awarded against Indemnified Party [in a final [non-appealable] judgment]] (collectively, “Losses”), [arising out of] any third-party claim alleging:[1]

The parties to the agreement have the option of making the indemnification provision mutual or unilateral. It’s not unusual, depending on the type of commercial transaction, for the parties to have different indemnification responsibilities. Specifically, the transaction can be set up where only one party indemnifies the other.

The indemnification provisions can apply to direct claims or third-party claims. Direct claims are claims that one of the parties to the contract will have as against the other party. The indemnification provision should clearly set forth that the indemnification is to cover only “direct claims” if that is the intent.

Third-Party claims are claims that an unknown or identified third-party may have against the indemnified party. Standard indemnification clauses are typically interpreted to cover the indemnification of third-party claims.

Another drafting error that parties make is failing to recognize the full extent of the indemnification provision. For example, the indemnification provision (in order to be complete) must provide that the provision requires the indemnifying party to “indemnify, defend and hold harmless”.

Finally, the indemnifying party’s obligation can be limited by the agreement. Specifically, the indemnifying party can limit its indemnity obligation by:

  • Negotiating to qualify certain provisions, for example, by using

-reasonableness to qualify attorneys’ fees;

-gross negligence to qualify the indemnifying party’s acts and omissions; or

  • Limiting the indemnity obligation to cover only claims arising in certain jurisdictions.
  • Limiting the definition of the Indemnified Party. For example, sellers often refuse to include the buyer’s customers as indemnified parties, since the losses and liabilities suffered by customers are often only partly attributable to the seller’s actions.
  • Limiting the indemnity obligation to losses and liabilities that are not covered by:

-insurance proceeds received by the indemnified party; and

-tax benefits received by the indemnified party.

  • Replacing the nexus phrase “arising out of” with the narrower:

-caused by;

-resulting from;

-solely resulting from; or

-to the extent they arise out of.[2]

Liquidated Damages

Liquidated damage clauses anticipate the amount of loss or attempt to set caps on the types of damages that may be recovered. Liquidated damages clauses are generally enforceable unless they are determined to be a penalty. (This is not to be confused with a limitation of remedies). Liquidated damages provisions are a means by which the parties may apportion the risk. It’s not necessary that these liquidated damages provisions be reciprocal.

Liquidated damages provisions receive different treatment depending on the jurisdiction. In this regard, it’s critical to understand the governing law of the jurisdiction at issue before drafting the liquid damages provision. (See II, above). The parties need to have a clear understanding as to the definition of the types of damages that could be at issue:

  • Compensatory damages;
  • Actual damages;
  • General damages;
  • Special damages;
  • Consequential damages;
  • Damages recoverable under the UCC;
  • Lost profits; and
  • Punitive damages

It’s important for the parties to not overreach with respect to drafting a limitation of damages provision and risk a determination that the agreement is unconscionable or fails of its essential purpose.

Merger Clause

The merger clause, similar to the recital provisions, is an important way for the parties to define the agreement. For example, an agreement may provide that:

This agreement, together with all exhibits referenced herein, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties in relation to the subject matter of this agreement and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings and commitments, whether oral or in writing, between the parties.

This is the most basic type of merger clause. Merger clauses can also provide express representations that no other promises or inducements have been made by the parties in agreeing to execute the agreement “and that the parties are not relying upon any statement or representation of any other party.”

The merger clause should also address the manner in which future amendments and/or modifications will be accepted. Specifically, the agreement could provide that:

This agreement may not be amended or modified in any manner except by a written document signed by both parties that expressly amends this agreement.

Accordingly, the basics of any merger clause will include:

  • a definition of the agreement;
  • an express exclusion of reliance;
  • a representation that the parties have conducted their own due diligence and relied solely upon their own due diligence; and
  • address the manner in which future amendments and modifications will be accepted.

Robert A. Burke is a Partner in the Litigation Department at MacElree Harvey, focusing on complex commercial and estate litigation. With extensive trial and appellate experience across federal, state, and international courts, Bob has a strong track record in resolving partnership disputes, trust and estate conflicts, and intellectual property matters.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Recognized in Best Law Firms® Rankings for 2025

November 2, 2024 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

West Chester, PA – MacElree Harvey, Ltd. is proud to announce its inclusion in the 15th edition of the Best Law Firms® rankings by Best Lawyers® for 2025. 

The 2025 Best Law Firms rankings underscore MacElree Harvey’s high standard of legal service across diverse practice areas, including family law, criminal defense, land use, and business litigation. Based on a proven methodology incorporating both qualitative and quantitative data on legal achievements and client successes, these rankings reflect a nationwide and regional assessment of law firms by more than 97,000 clients and 23,000 attorneys.

“These rankings serve as a true North Star for the industry,” said Best Lawyers CEO Phillip Greer. “We know that the legal profession–like so many industries today–is undergoing a transformation led by proliferating technology, global demands, and evolving social norms.”

MacElree Harvey’s commitment to serving its clients and communities from offices in West Chester, PA, Kennett Square, PA, Hockessin, DE, and Centreville, DE, remains steadfast. Recognized in the 2025 Best Law Firms rankings, the firm’s experienced attorneys and dedicated staff look forward to upholding the high standards reflected in these prestigious rankings.

For more information about MacElree Harvey and its inclusion in the 2025 Best Law Firms rankings, please visit the firm’s profile on Best Law Firms.
About MacElree Harvey, Ltd.

Founded over 140 years ago, MacElree Harvey, Ltd. combines traditional legal excellence with innovative solutions to meet the diverse needs of its clients. With an extensive range of services and a focus on building long-lasting relationships, the firm stands as a respected leader in the region. Visit macelree.com for more information on how MacElree Harvey is advancing the needs of individuals, businesses, and communities.

For media inquiries, please contact:
Sierra Rayne
MacElree Harvey, Ltd.  
West Chester, PA  
Phone: (610) 436-0100
Email: [email protected]

Filed Under: Uncategorized

MacElree Harvey Hosts Charity Jeans Day to Support Local School After Fire

October 11, 2024 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

In the wake of a tragic fire that destroyed the lower school building at St. Francis of Assisi on October 7, 2024, MacElree Harvey is demonstrating its ongoing commitment to the community by hosting a Charity Jeans Day.

All contributions will go directly toward assisting the school’s recovery efforts, showing solidarity and support for the students, faculty, and families impacted by the tragedy.

“As a law firm, we believe in giving back to the community that has housed and supported so many of our firm team members for so many years,” said Michelle Foster, CEO of MacElree Harvey. “Hosting this Charity Jeans Day is just one small way we can come together as a team to make a meaningful difference and let the community know that they can count on us.”

The firm invited everyone in the four offices to participate and contribute, emphasizing the power of unity and teamwork in times of need. 

For more information on how to donate and support St. Francis of Assisi school, please visit bit.ly/400OtGw.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

MacElree Harvey’s Lou Mincarelli Appointed to Innovate Chester County Steering Committee

October 7, 2024 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

West Chester, PA — MacElree Harvey Ltd. is proud to announce that the Honorable Lou Mincarelli, Partner at MacElree Harvey and former Judge of the Chester County Court of Common Pleas, has been selected by the Chester County Commissioners to serve as one of three members on the Steering Committee for Innovate Chester County, a new initiative aimed at addressing key challenges within the county.

Innovate Chester County is designed to gather input from residents and explore innovative solutions to pressing issues such as affordable housing, public transportation, children’s mental health, veteran services, and agriculture. 

As a member of the Steering Committee, Lou Mincarelli will contribute his extensive legal experience and deep understanding of the community to ensure the initiative is guided by informed leadership. The Steering Committee’s responsibilities include reviewing public submissions, ensuring workgroups focus on their respective issues, and contributing to the final report that will outline recommended strategies for the County Commissioners.

For more information about Innovate Chester County and how to get involved, visit www.chesco.org/innovatechesco.

About MacElree Harvey, Ltd.

MacElree Harvey Ltd. is a full-service law firm with offices in Pennsylvania and Delaware, providing expert legal services across a wide range of practice areas. For over 140 years, the firm has been committed to providing innovative and personalized legal representation to individuals, families, and businesses.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Employment Law Update September, 2024

October 1, 2024 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

We are back after summer recess to give you the latest updates in the world of employment law for September, 2024.  In this month’s iteration, Penn State has to reckon with the Department of Labor on equal pay, free speech is implicated in a federal “preferred pronoun” case, and UPS suffers a major verdict for racial harassment.  Read all the latest below.

Penn State Agrees to $703K Settlement in DOL Wage Discrimination Case

Penn State University has agreed to pay over $703,700 to settle allegations from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) that it paid 65 women less than their male counterparts in similar roles. These women, employed in maintenance, research, teaching, and administrative positions, were found to have been underpaid since at least July 2020, according to a review by the DOL’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP).

The settlement includes $682,419 in back pay and $21,323 in interest. Penn State has also committed to reviewing and adjusting its pay policies to prevent future disparities. The university stressed that the pay inequities were unintentional, but emphasized its commitment to addressing the issue fairly.

This case arose as part of a routine compliance review, which uncovered wage gaps at Penn State’s main University Park campus, impacting various departments including the College of Engineering and the College of Agricultural Sciences. The university receives significant federal funding, exceeding $178 million in 2024, and is required to ensure equitable employment practices under Executive Order 11246.

In its announcement relating to the settlement, Penn State has pledged to ensure pay equity for all employees.

Eleventh Circuit Transgender Pronoun Case Could Have Implications for Free Speech 

The Eleventh Circuit Court recently heard oral arguments in a case brought by transgender and nonbinary Florida public school teachers challenging the state’s law, H.B. 1069, which restricts the use of preferred pronouns that do not match biological sex. The case focuses on Katie Wood, a transgender teacher, who was granted a preliminary injunction allowing her to continue using her preferred pronouns at work while pursuing a First Amendment claim.

During the hearing, the panel of judges asked numerous hypothetical questions to explore the limits of free speech protections for teachers, addressing scenarios such as teachers using titles like “Mr. MAGA” or “Captain Woke” and whether the state could enforce specific honorifics. Wood’s attorney argued that her pronoun usage is protected speech under the First Amendment, referencing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton, which upheld private expression rights for public school employees.

The state’s defense maintained that regulating how teachers refer to themselves falls within the state’s authority to manage its workforce. The court’s decision in this case could have significant implications for free speech rights of public employees across various sectors.

The case is Wood et al. v. Florida Department of Education et al., case number 24-11239, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

UPS Hit with $238 Million Verdict for Hostile Work Environment

A federal jury in Washington awarded $237.6 million to Tahvio Gratton, a former UPS driver, in a racial discrimination lawsuit. Gratton, who is Black, alleged that he faced racial harassment from his supervisors and was wrongfully terminated after complaining about the mistreatment. The jury awarded him $39.6 million for emotional distress and $198 million in punitive damages.

Gratton claimed he experienced discrimination after transferring to Yakima in 2018, where he was treated differently than his white coworkers. A white manager repeatedly referred to him as “boy,” a term with deep racist connotations, even in front of customers. When Gratton complained, his supervisors dismissed his concerns, exacerbating his distress. After raising further complaints, Gratton said he was overloaded with work and targeted for minor issues.

UPS, however, argued that Gratton was fired for allegedly assaulting a female coworker, a claim he denied. The company has expressed disappointment with the verdict and plans to appeal, citing legal errors during the trial.

Gratton’s attorney praised the jury’s decision, viewing it as a victory for workers facing similar discrimination across the country. UPS plans to challenge the ruling.

The case is Gratton v. United Parcel Service Inc., case number 22-03149, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington.

Jeff Burke is an attorney at MacElree Harvey, Ltd., working in the firm’s Employment and Litigation practice groups. Jeff counsels businesses and individuals on employment practices and policies, executive compensation, employee hiring and separation issues, non-competition and other restrictive covenants, wage and hour disputes, and other employment-related matters. Jeff represents businesses and individuals in employment litigation such as employment contract disputes, workforce classification audits, and discrimination claims based upon age, sex, race, religion, disability, sexual harassment, and hostile work environment.  Jeff also practices in commercial litigation as well as counsels business on commercial contract matters.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

MacElree Harvey CEO Michelle Foster Named Among Philadelphia Business Journal’s “Most Admired CEOs” of 2024

September 12, 2024 by MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Leave a Comment

WEST CHESTER, PA | September 12, 2024 — MacElree Harvey is proud to announce that our CEO, Michelle Foster, has been honored as one of Philadelphia Business Journal’s “Most Admired CEOs” for 2024. This prestigious accolade recognizes exemplary C-suite leaders who excel in vision, agility, and leadership across a wide array of industries.

Michelle Foster’s selection is a testament to her outstanding leadership in navigating the business side of our firm while fostering a compassionate and positive workplace culture. Her dedication to the firm’s growth, coupled with her ability to inspire and lead, has left a profound impact on both the organization and its clients.

In addition to her leadership qualities, Michelle was also recognized for the firm’s significant financial growth over the past five years, a testament to her strategic vision and commitment to excellence.

The Philadelphia Business Journal will feature Michelle and her fellow honorees in a special edition on December 13th, 2024. She joins a distinguished group of 25 leaders from diverse sectors, showcasing the best in business leadership. Below is a selection of this year’s esteemed honorees:

– Michelle Foster, CEO, MacElree Harvey – West Chester

– Alaine Arnott, President & CEO, National Liberty Museum – Philadelphia

– Todd Briddell, CEO, CenterSquare Investment Management – Conshohocken

– Sarah Burlew, Founder & CEO, Omlie Consulting – Conshohocken

– Bill Darcy Jr., CEO, National Kitchen & Bath Association – Bethlehem

– Jim Dever, Market President, Bank of America – Greater Philadelphia

– Dr. Peter Katsufrakis, President, National Board of Medical Examiners – Philadelphia

– George Matysik, Executive Director, Share Food Program – Philadelphia

– Charles “Chuck” McLister, President & CEO, Elwyn – Media

– Abhi Rastogi, President & CEO, Temple University Hospital – Philadelphia

– Stacey Robertson, President, Widener University – Chester

– Michael Tiagwad, President & CEO, Conner Strong & Buckelew – Camden

For more information about the award and to read the full feature on December 13th, visit the Philadelphia Business Journal’s website.

About MacElree Harvey:

MacElree Harvey is a full-service law firm dedicated to providing exceptional legal services to businesses and individuals. With a rich history and a forward-thinking approach.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Page 5
  • Page 6
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

  • Articles by Our Attorneys
  • News
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Newsletters

Footer

(610) 436-0100

LEGAL SERVICES

  • Banking & Finance Law
  • Business & Corporate Law
  • Criminal Defense
  • Employment Law
  • Estates & Trusts Law
  • Family Law
  • Litigation Law
  • Personal Injury Law
  • Real Estate & Land Use Law
  • Tax Law

ABOUT US

  • Our History
  • Our Approach
  • Social Responsibility
  • Testimonials

NEWS & INSIGHTS

  • Articles by Our Attorneys
  • News
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Newsletters

OFFICES

Centreville, DE

5721 Kennett Pike
Wilmington, DE 19807
302-654-4454
Learn More

Hockessin, DE

724 Yorklyn Rd #100
Hockessin, DE 19707
302-239-3700
Learn More

Kennett Square, PA

209 East State Street Road
Kennett Square, PA 19348
610-444-3180
Learn More

West Chester, PA

17 West Miner Street
West Chester, PA 19382
610-436-0100
Learn More

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Staff Only
  • Careers

© 2025 and all rights reserved by MacElree Harvey, Ltd.