Supply Chains Crack Under Pandemic as Corporate Counsel Tangle Over Novel Force Majeure Issues
The force majeure issue is "coming up in every industry, every supply chain—from medical and pharmaceutical to computers to planned special events," said Cristina Shea, a partner in Reed Smith's San Francisco office.
March 20, 2020 at 05:00 PM
4 minute read
Amid the tumult surrounding the coronavirus, lawyers say legal issues related to force majeure contract clauses are reaching a frenzied pitch, and the courts may be asked to resolve novel issues.
"'Force majeure.' I've heard that phrase more in the last three days than in my 30 years of law practice," said attorney Louis Chodoff, who is based in Ballard Spahr's Cherry Hill, New Jersey, office. Since Chodoff is an employment lawyer, one can only imagine what the contract lawyers are hearing.
"We are swamped," Cristina Shea told Corporate Counsel. "Everything is on fire right now." Shea, a partner in Reed Smith's San Francisco office, focuses on representing corporations in disputes with their insurance companies.
Shea said the force majeure issue is "coming up in every industry, every supply chain—from medical and pharmaceutical to computers to planned special events." The phrase means an uncontrollable event that keeps one party from fulfilling a contractual agreement while being legally excused for it.
Shea's office works both on assisting clients who want to enforce contracts and on helping other clients who can't fulfill their obligations. She has been working long hours while sheltering in place in San Francisco, while others in her national law firm are also working from home unless there is a compelling reason not to.
"I would definitely say it's not normal business hours," she said. "It's crisis mode, and clients around the globe in all different time zones need immediate response and attention."
Shea said what is different about the coronavirus crisis from other force majeure events is the sheer scope of it and its ripple effect on supply chains, not only by closed businesses and sick employees, but also by the impact of government travel bans.
"What's different is the continual impact of this," she explained. "Hurricanes and earthquakes seem more limited in geography and time. But this one has a global impact that is spreading across borders and across all industries. And it just keeps going."
Meryl Macklin and Mark Duedall, partners at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner, said companies and their lawyers are in "uncharted waters" on whether force majeure covers this pandemic. On Friday they held the first of the law firm's several 19-minute webinars dealing with coronavirus legal questions.
Duedall said the first step in assisting clients "is helping them understand the process." He said one must find the relevant contract provisions, extract them and filter them through the law.
Macklin said they have compiled a 50-state survey of differences in force majeure law that shows most states followed a predictable pattern in past cases. A couple states have no laws, she said, and one, New York, is very restrictive in only applying force majeure if the event is listed in the contract clause.
She said companies also can use the doctrine of impracticability or impossibility if there is no force majeure clause in the contract, except in Kentucky, which does not allow the doctrine.
"Right now it's an open question of whether an 'act of God' includes a pandemic," Macklin said. We found nothing [in the cases] that looks like the situation we are in now."
The questions could all just end in massive litigation, "but at the moment I am thinking that likely will not happen," she said.
Not everyone agrees. One is Scott Seaman, a partner in Hinshaw & Culbertson's Chicago office and co-chair of the firm's global insurance services practice group.
Seaman, who primarily represents insurance companies, said he is seeing general counsel being more aggressive about pursuing coverage for their companies' lost business and lost profits.
"I think we are seeing policyholder lawyers staking out positions in their articles and advertisements," he explained, "and we'll see a lot of litigation over business interruption coverage."
Seaman said some legislators have even discussed bills to require insurers to pay for business losses due to the coronavirus. "That could have disastrous consequences for the industry," he said.
The impact of the coronavirus could make the courts swing more liberal when interpreting force majeure provisions, Seaman said. "And, in my opinion, the courts should not allow events to distort contract law right now."
Seaman called the dynamics "very interesting. In terms of how it will play out in the courts, we'll see. But the parties are lining up."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPorsche's Venture Capital Arm Adds General Counsel From Clifford Chance
How a 200,000-Worker Global Enterprise Took Down the Silos and Made ESG Its Mission
4 minute readCorporate Counsel's 2024 Award Winners Performed Legal Wizardry, Gave a Hand Up to Others
'We’re Here to Empower People to Make Good Decisions': Why Compliance Chiefs Must Learn to Think Like a Businessperson
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1The Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims
- 2Dallas Jury Awards $98.65M in Botham Jean Killing by Dallas Officer
- 3In Talc Bankruptcy, Andy Birchfield Skipped His Deposition. Could He Face Sanctions?
- 4Pharmaceutical Patents: Benefits and Challenges
- 5Where Do Web-Tracking Class Actions Belong? 8th Circuit Weighs the Issue
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250