Legalities & Realities®: The Blog

For successful professionals and business owners, protecting what you’ve built means more than managing growth, it means minimizing exposure to the legal disputes that can derail everything. One issue that’s often overlooked, but frequently lands in litigation, is what happens when a member of a limited liability company (“LLC”) dies.

Trusts have long been a cornerstone of sophisticated estate planning, allowing individuals and families to preserve wealth, protect assets, and ensure financial security for future generations. For business owners, executive professionals, and high-net-worth individuals, trusts serve as powerful tools to separate and safeguard assets.

When a bank-account owner passes away, what happens next depends on how the account was structured. For business owners, executives, and professionals, understanding these nuances is important for protecting assets and avoiding unnecessary entanglement in probate court.

When litigation involves substantial business assets, executive compensation, trust and estate matters, or high-net-worth divorces, discovery compliance is critical. Courts expect parties to conduct thorough, transparent searches for requested documents—and when records cannot be found, a Jackson affidavit may be required to explain why.

In high-stakes litigation, the discovery process plays a crucial role. This applies to business disputes, employment conflicts, matrimonial asset divisions, and trust and estate contests. Courts expect parties to conduct thorough searches for relevant documents, and failing to do so can lead to serious consequences. One important tool in complex litigation is the Jackson affidavit, a sworn statement detailing a party’s efforts to locate requested records.

In federal employment litigation, retaliation claims are often brought alongside discrimination claims. However, what happens when the discrimination claim is dismissed or denied by motion practice? Can evidence of alleged discrimination still be introduced at trial when only the retaliation claim remains?

Imagine this scenario: You’ve spent months negotiating a lucrative business opportunity—perhaps a merger, a strategic partnership, or an executive employment agreement. Just as the deal is about to close, a third party deliberately steps in and disrupts it, causing the opportunity to evaporate. If this interference was done using underhanded tactics or with pure malice, you may have a legal claim under tortious interference with prospective economic relations in New York.

When navigating legal disputes that intersect with constitutional rights, understanding the legal standards that govern these cases is important.  One such area of litigation involves 42 U.S.C. § 1983 First Amendment retaliation claims, which arise when an individual alleges that a government employer retaliated against him or her for exercising his or her constitutional right to free speech under the Federal Constitution’s First Amendment.