Adams on Contract Drafting

Reverse Autonomous Definitions?

Ken Adams — Sat, 10 Jan 2026 20:21:51 +0000

Check out the following, which is the text of an entire section: See the highlighted sentence at the end? It reminded me of that there’s another way of creating defined terms using autonomous definitions. At least for now, I’m calling this technique a “reverse autonomous definition.” Allow me to demonstrate how it plays out. Here’s an autonomous definition: “Affiliate” means ... Read More

The post Reverse Autonomous Definitions? appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.

M&A Drafting: Double Materiality in the Bringdown Condition Is a Nonissue

Ken Adams — Sat, 10 Jan 2026 15:48:48 +0000

I’ll now revisit something I last wrote about in 2013: double materiality in the bringdown condition. (I see the term “double materiality” thrown around in other contexts, so I think it’s best to be specific.) The Theory Here’s a statement of fact (in the language of the Ancient Ones, a “representation and warranty”) and the associated bringdown condition, neither qualified ... Read More

The post M&A Drafting: Double Materiality in the Bringdown Condition Is a Nonissue appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.

“Battle-Tested” Contracts?

Ken Adams — Mon, 05 Jan 2026 13:23:17 +0000

Longtime readers will be aware that I roll my eyes at the notion of relying on contract language that has been “tested” by courts. As I say in a 2006 blog post, “Why rely on language that resulted in litigation? Instead, express any given concept clearly, so you don’t have to gamble on case law breathing into it the desired ... Read More

The post “Battle-Tested” Contracts? appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.

When “Greater or Lesser” Doesn’t Work

Ken Adams — Tue, 23 Dec 2025 03:49:05 +0000

Here’s an instance of the phrase greater or lesser: Unobjectionable, right? Here’s another instance: Unobjectionable too, no? Here’s another example of the same sort: That’s unobjectionable too, right? Actually, the second and third examples don’t work. The first example refers to something getting bigger or smaller. So in that context, greater means “bigger” and lesser means “smaller”. By contrast, the ... Read More

The post When “Greater or Lesser” Doesn’t Work appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.

Say Hi to “Ambiguity of the Specific Versus the General”

Ken Adams — Sat, 20 Dec 2025 03:13:23 +0000

The post before this one—the one about a reference in an insurance policy to “insects, birds, rodents, or other animals” (here)—made me realize I have to restructure in one respect how A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting presents ambiguity. I put the discussion of ejusdem generis in the section of chapter 13 (Selected Usages) dealing with including. And I ... Read More

The post Say Hi to “Ambiguity of the Specific Versus the General” appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.

“Insects, Birds, Rodents, or Other Animals”: Ejusdem Generis Strikes Again

Ken Adams — Fri, 19 Dec 2025 14:15:26 +0000

I noticed this story from Iowa local news channel KCRG: An eastern Iowa veterinary hospital is suing its insurer in a dispute over the definition of an “animal.” … The lawsuit alleges that about 8:15 a.m. on Nov. 7, 2024, an adult deer crashed through one of the hospital’s windows and entered the building. “The deer rampaged through the property’s ... Read More

The post “Insects, Birds, Rodents, or Other Animals”: Ejusdem Generis Strikes Again appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.

When an Unaffiliated Entity Acts on a Party’s Behalf in a Contract

Ken Adams — Sat, 13 Dec 2025 17:58:01 +0000

Consider the shall in this sentence from a public-company merger agreement: As soon as practicable after the First Effective Time, the Exchange Agent shall, on behalf of all such holders of fractional shares of Parent Common Stock, effect the sale of all such shares of Parent Common Stock that would otherwise have been issuable as part of the Merger Consideration ... Read More

The post When an Unaffiliated Entity Acts on a Party’s Behalf in a Contract appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.

“Reasonably Agree”

Ken Adams — Tue, 09 Dec 2025 17:53:55 +0000

Let’s fill a gap in A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting! MSDC has something to say about mutually agree, and it has something to say generally about reasonably modifying a verb, but it doesn’t say anything about reasonably agree. I’m here to tell you that if you’re contemplating using reasonably agree in a contract, you might want to hold ... Read More

The post “Reasonably Agree” appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.

Treating “This Agreement” as a Defined Term Is Silly

Ken Adams — Mon, 08 Dec 2025 19:47:41 +0000

I’ve written about the defined term this Agreement more often than I might have expected. (See for example this 2018 blog post and this 2016 blog post.) Yet here I am writing about it again, because I’d like to have in one place all my arguments on the subject, including one I’ve articulated only recently—what’s under the heading “An Explanation.” ... Read More

The post Treating “This Agreement” as a Defined Term Is Silly appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.

Replacing “Once” in Contracts: An Example of Sweating the Small Stuff

Ken Adams — Sat, 29 Nov 2025 18:55:10 +0000

In this post, I explain why in contracts, instead of the conjunction once, I use if or I just delete once, depending on the context. I do that because when drafting a contract, you should aim to make all your choices be good ones, whether a lot is at stake or only a little. Or as we are prone to ... Read More

The post Replacing “Once” in Contracts: An Example of Sweating the Small Stuff appeared first on Adams on Contract Drafting.