The world of business litigation covers a lot of territories. You'll find, however, that certain common issues tend to come up in all cases. A business litigation lawyer oftentimes has to worry about these three basic concerns.
Venue
In American law, the concept of venue refers to the place where a matter will be tried. The big thing to worry about when it comes to the venue is that it dictates which state's laws will be used to litigate the matter. If you're worried about the prospect of a federal appeal happening, venue also determines which circuit court is likely to hear the case.
Venue clauses are very common in contracts, and the terms of an agreement will guide the decision regarding where a case might be handled. Similarly, the place where the bulk of the business transaction took place matters. Also, the court will want to see evidence that your company has ties to the state of venue.
Discovery
Especially when there is a dispute over the facts in a case, the court will order what's called discovery. This is a disclosure process where both parties to a matter must turn over relevant evidence. In business litigation, this might include the discovery of emails, texts, memos, receipts, company data, and manifests.
Note that all relevant and producible evidence must be turned over. Failure to do so may result in what's called an adverse inference. This means the court will consider the missing evidence to be extremely bad for your case, and that may result in sanctions, dismissal of the case or a summary judgment, depending on the circumstances.
Scope
Particularly in the examination of contracts, one of the most important factors in how the court will treat disputes is a concept known as scope. Legal scope can cover a wide arrange of concerns about a contract's terms, including whether a clause served a valid business purpose, was limited in its time of effectiveness, and even the reasonableness of its applicability across regions. Providing valuable compensation for acceptance is also important.
Suppose you were trying to litigate a breach of a non-compete agreement involving an employee. To be valid, the agreement must not be open-ended, and it must be reasonable in terms of the provided compensation and the ability of the employee to seek future work. Judges frown upon contract terms that effectively prevent employment or commerce, and litigators generally tread carefully in this territory.
