Fort Lauderdale Business Fraud Attorney: Breach of Contract, Unfair Business Practices, Trademark Infringement, Interference with Economic Relationship, Trade Secret Disclosure, Business Disparagement and Defamation
Our South Florida business litigation attorney represents entrepreneurs, professionals, small businesses, inventors, and private companies as plaintiffs and defendants in a range of business litigation matters: Business Disputes, Breach of Contract, Partnership Disputes, Unfair Competition, Trade Secret Disclosure, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Unfair Business Practices, Business Fraud, Shareholder Disputes. Business litigation can involve simple business transactions as well as complex business transactions, sometimes involving thousands of pages of corporate legal documents. Prosecuting or defending such lawsuits requires detailed investigation and preparation.
Our firm understands that litigation is significant for small businesses – it can be time consuming and costly. We understand that many business owners, particularly start-ups, lack the resources, both financial and operational, to handle diversions from their daily business transactions. For most South Florida start-ups and small businesses, generally surviving on small profit margins, business litigation costs can often prove disastrous. Although business litigation expenses can be tax deductible and expensed in most cases, the time cost and lost production of a small business is extremely burdensome for the business owner. For that reason, our attorneys are sensitive to the legal fees necessary to properly defend or prosecute a business matter and will do whatever we can to provide flexible fees and billing options.
At every stage of the business litigation process, from evaluation of claims, staffing and initial strategy development, to document and information management, through discovery and trial preparation, settlement or verdict, our South Florida business litigation lawyers are cognizant of client needs and zealous in our representation of those clients.
Business Fraud News
Earlier this year, the United States Supreme Court decided New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira. The Supreme Court ruled that transportation workers engaged in interstate commerce—including those labeled as independent contractors—are exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and thus cannot be compelled to undergo mandatory arbitration. Justice Gorsuch, writing for a unanimous Court, held that plaintiff Dominic Oliveira, a trucker driving for defendant New Prime, had the right to litigate his wage and hour claims in court, rather than have them decided by an arbitrator.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider whether federal courts have the authority to waive a Title VII plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), or state equivalent, before filing a complaint in federal court. A person who wants to sue under Title VII (or other federal employment anti-discrimination laws) must first file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. This is known as “administrative exhaustion.” The case before the Supreme Court is Fort Bend County v. Davis.
Lois Davis, an IT supervisor for Fort Bend County, Texas, sued Fort Bend County in federal district court, alleging retaliation and religious discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Davis claims she was fired for not reporting to work on a Sunday (she attended a church service), in retaliation for reporting that she was sexually harassed and sexually assaulted by a superior. She filed sexual harassment and retaliation charges with the Texas Workforce Commission. After investigating, the Commission told her she could sue and she brought a retaliation and religious discrimination lawsuit against Fort Bend. Fort Bend pointed out she didn’t exhaust her administrative remedies by filing a charge of religious discrimination with the Texas Workforce Commission. After several appeals, the Fifth Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling dismissing Davis’ claim. In its reversal, the Fifth Circuit ruled that a federal court could hear Title VII claims even if the plaintiff had not completed an administrative process required under Title VII because Fort Bend waived the defense by waiting five years to raise it.