North Carolina Employment Attorney

Acquisitions of Businesses By James R. Vann Vann & Sheridan Video Legal Pad Hi and welcome to this session of Vann & Sheridan’s Video Legal Pad. I’m James Vann and we’re going to talk about today acquisitions of businesses. You may be either trying to sell your business or buy another business and we get calls quite often from clients saying, “Well what do we do and how to we handle that?” The first thing that you enter into would be a letter of intent with the company that’s being purchased. And basically what that letter of intent does is it slows down the parties once they’ve been identified, it gives the buyer some time to have exclusivity to look at that company for purchasing, but it also gives them a right of protection so that in case they change their mind they can back out and there is no liability on either side. And a letter of intent, quite frankly, puts some terms and conditions in them maybe early, but it also gives the parties some due diligence about having an opportunity or chance to look at that business and whether or not it really is a business that they want to purchase. So the letter of intent is the first document and if the company is a company that wants to be acquired and the buyer wants to buy the company, the next step is entering into the terms and conditions for the purchase agreement. Well, the purchase agreement is a very long and can be a long and complex document but typically what it outlines is: the timing of issues, when the closing …

This digital document is an article from Business North Carolina, published by Business North Carolina on January 1, 2004. The length of the article is 686 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.

Citation Details
Title: Employment.(women advocates)(Biography)
Author: Irwin Speizer
Publication: Business North Carolina (Magazine/Journal)
Date: January 1, 2004
Publisher: Business North Carolina
Volume: 24 Issue: 1 Page: 63(1)

Article Type: Biography

Distributed by Thomson Gale

Employment.(women advocates)(Biography): An article from: Business North Carolina

Motorcycle Lawyers Discuss the Legal Challenges of Bikers of Lesser Tolerance as it Brings Civil Disobedience and Constitutional Court Challenge to North Carolina
By Ray Henke, a motorcycle accident lawyer and member of Bikers of Lesser Tolerance, California
Freedom fighters joined to form BOLT of North Carolina and are currently bringing nonviolent civil disobedience and constitutional court challenge to the streets and courts of the state in response to the enactment of North Carolina’s new helmet law.
The North Carolina helmet law, which went into effect on January 1, 2008, is the same law that NTSB is recommending to state legislatures nationwide, with the insurance industry and medical lobbies throwing their weight behind the NTSB recommendations. The law requires motorcyclists to wear helmets compliant with the federal motorcycle safety helmet standards set forth at FMVSS 218. The North Carolina law, and all other state laws requiring riders to ride with helmets that meet FMVSS 218 plainly are incapable of being understood by the ordinarily intelligent person, and are certainly incapable of being applied, except incompetently, subjectively, arbitrarily, and discriminatory by law enforcement officers. FMVSS 218 is just a list of laboratory procedures and arbitrary impact criteria. You have to be an engineer to understand it, and you have to have the laboratory equipment to apply it. Such laws are unconstitutional because the due process clause of the United States Constitution requires that law be comprehensible specifically so that the citizenry can know what is prohibited, and to avoid arbitrary and discriminatory application of the law by police and the judiciary. You are invited to learn more about the motorcycle lawyers perspective on the Constitutional defects in helmet laws.
The BOLT of North Carolina freedom fighters refuse to be constrained by this unconstitutionally vague legislation. They are holding protestrallies all over the state with a frequency and drawing numbers of bikers refusing to abide the law that has not been witnessed anywhere in the United States in decades. They have sponsored already over a dozen helmet protest rides, in which the riders make their own choices whether to wear helmets. And if they ride with helmets, they make their own choices as to the kinds of headgear they wear, undeterred by North Carolina’s attempt to force them to wear the riding hat specified by this new state biker dress code. The BOLT of North Carolina riders have been joined in their protest by individual bikers numbering over 500, angered by the state’s intrusion upon their freedom, coming from all over North Carolina. According to the Director of BOLT of North Carolina, Janice MacKay, “The next acts of civil disobedience in North Carolina are the 2nd Annual East Coast Helmet Protest on May 18th, followed by the Maggie Valley Freedom Ride on NC Bikers Freedom Ride Day, June 12th, and the WNC Freedom Ride in Asheville from Buncombe’s County to Henderson County on June 21st.”
It is expected that BOLT of North Carolina will also hold a freedom ride “in solidarity” with BOLT of California, and ABATE of California, organized by BOLT member, Red Barron. Two years ago the San Diego police laid in wait for the participants, setting up roadblocks and issuing helmet tickets. This past year, the police stayed their distance. Similarly in North Carolina, notwithstanding the threats of law enforcement to strictly enforce the new helmet law, Ms. McKay reports that it is difficult to obtain a helmet ticket without riding back and forth outside the state police headquarters in Raleigh.
If North Carolina will rise to the challenge to enforce the law, BOLT of North Carolina hopes to clog the traffic courts at an average cost to the state of $872 per helmet citation trial, also requiring the law enforcement officers to appear and explain upon what incompetent basis they issued the tickets, providing the evidentiary basis for the initial constitutional challenge that the FMVSS 218 based law cannot be understood by the biker or cop and therefore is unconstitutionally vague.
At the same time, BOLT of the North Carolina is active in the legislature, with a no compromise helmet law repeal bill recently drafted and distributed to all North Carolina legislators by Jan MacKay. BOLT is also actively opposing the Street Gang Act and other legislation often employed by law enforcement arbitrarily and discriminatory against bikers who chose to wear colors.
This article is provided by Ray Henke, a California lawyer, founder of Motorcyclists Against Dumb Drivers, and co-moderator of Bruce & Ray’s Biker Forum, also a member of Bikers of Lesser Tolerance, and contributor to Biker, Born to Ride and Thunder Road magazines.

Originally published here.