How to deal with a job applicant’s past

Dear Mary, I am hiring for a new position and I’ve been researching all of the applicants online. Imagine my surprise when I found out that one of the applicants was recently charged with a pretty major offense. Can I ask him about it? If he really did it, can I pass on hiring him?

When it comes to asking questions about an applicant’s criminal history, the general rule is that you may not ask an applicant to disclose information about an arrest that did not result in a conviction.

You may ask a job applicant if they have prior convictions or whether they are currently facing pending charges, but you may not ask whether they have ever been arrested.

You are also prohibited from asking an applicant about participation in a diversion program. Diversion programs allow criminal offenders to avoid criminal charges and a criminal record, usually by educating the offender about avoiding offenses, providing restitution to victims, doing community service, and avoiding situations that may lead to future offenses.

However, there are exceptions to this rule. If someone is applying for a position in a criminal justice agency, or as a peace officer, or any position that relates to security, you may ask about an applicant’s criminal background.

If you’re running a health facility, you can ask about arrests relating to sex offenses if the job position is one where the applicant would have regular access to patients. An applicant’s character and prior conduct is relevant here because you, as the employer, are responsible for the safety and well-being of others.

If the position provides access to drugs or medications, an employer may ask about arrests involving controlled substances.

A public utility or cable company may ask about an applicant’s criminal history when the position would require the applicant to go into a person’s private home.

And finally, an employer may ask about pending criminal charges and about arrests for which the applicant is out on bail or on their own recognizance. This exception sounds like it fits with your situation.

The second part of your question is more complicated. If the conduct that resulted in an offense would indicate that the applicant is unsuitable for the position, then you may pass on hiring them. For example, if the position is for a bank teller and the applicant has a criminal record of embezzlement, not hiring them may be justified.

Whether conduct demonstrates unfitness for a position may be determined by considering the nature of the offense, the time that has passed since the conduct occurred, and the nature of the position.

An arrest alone is not evidence that a person has actually committed a crime. If the alleged conduct relates to the job, you should look at the circumstances surrounding the arrest and ask the applicant to hear their side of the story.

Once you’ve given the applicant a meaningful opportunity to explain an arrest, you should make a reasonable effort to determine whether or not that explanation is credible before you make an employment decision. Disqualifying an applicant based on an arrest only makes sense if it looks like the applicant really did engage in the offense, and that offense relates to the job.

Mary Luros is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers — or attorneys.

Drafting a letter of intent

Dear Mary, I read your last column about letters of intent and I think I need one for a deal I’m working on. Should I write it, or can they write it? What should it contain?

When discussing letters of intent, the first question should be who will draft the letter. Sometimes it’s easier to carefully review a letter; other times it’s more cost-effective to prepare your own document. There is some strategy involved in deciding whether to draft or review the letter.

The party that drafts the letter will decide whether it will be a one-page commitment, or whether it will be a longer, more specific letter.

The drafter identifies what issues the letter addresses, and which will be addressed later, as well as what the deal-breakers are. The drafting party can also make the initial call of whether or not the letter will be enforceable or binding. Of course, the reviewing party can make changes to the draft.

The basic premise of the letter of intent is that it will document about what the parties have already agreed, while identifying issues that need further clarification. It can be a great timesaving tool because it allows the parties to concentrate on the real issues, as opposed to negotiating the entire contract at once.

Once you begin writing the letter of intent, you will see what problems will be major and what issues can be resolved more easily.

The biggest hurdle in drafting a letter of intent is whether or not to make it binding. If you say in the letter that it’s not legally binding, that’s usually enough to make it non-binding. However, parties are sometimes disinclined to state that it’s non-binding because it might encourage the other side to feel free to back out.

Some portions of the letter should be binding, including confidentiality, non-solicitation, termination date, and access of information terms. If you’re negotiating buying a business, make the “bust-up fee” provision binding as well. A bust-up fee covers your time and costs if the seller backs out.

The portions of the letter that are usually non-binding relate to the configuration of the deal and the parties’ general interest in the transaction. Sometimes a letter of intent will let one side conduct its due diligence and back out of the deal if it is unsatisfied with the investigation.

In some situations, I recommend executing a separate confidentiality agreement outside of the letter of intent to protect your private information. If the letter of intent is found to be non-binding, a confidentiality provision in the letter won’t do you much good.

Please don’t make the mistake of moving forward with only a letter of intent and no contract. But if you do, the letter of intent can help resolve issues and clarify the rights and duties of each party. If you don’t have a contract and you end up in litigation, the court may look at the letter of intent to determine what the parties intended.

Your final contract should address every issue that comes up in negotiations, as well as some issues that may pop up in the future. The contract will also include typical provisions that weren’t in your letter of intent, like warranty disclaimers, limitations of liability, and alternative dispute resolution provisions.

Mary Luros is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers — or attorneys.

What’s the “intent”?

I have a small toy-making company and I’m working on a deal with a national chain to sell some of my toys. I’m worried that they might take advantage of me because I’m smaller, and we haven’t worked out enough details to make an actual contract.

Should I do a “letter of intent” or put something in writing to confirm the issues we’ve already decided? Is there any “teeth” behind such a letter?

A letter of intent (or a memorandum of understanding) is a writing that explains some or all of the structure of a future business deal. The parties express their commitment to the subject matter or to the process of negotiating a more definitive agreement. Such a letter can be formal or informal, and it may be legally binding in whole or in part, or it may be legally nonbinding.

A letter of intent is a great tool for negotiating a business deal like yours. You can use it to set your expectations, to identify the bigger issues that need to be fleshed out, and to clarify the who, what, where and when.

It’s also a useful tool for preventing the other side from walking away from the deal. If you are unsure of their commitment, asking them to sign a letter of intent can be a great litmus test to see if they truly are dedicated to getting the deal done. If they balk on signing it, you know where you stand.

Sometimes, a letter of intent is useful to summarize the proposed deal so that one of the parties can take it to their board of directors or investors or whomever needs to approve the transaction before they commit to it.

Letters of intent can also be useful down the road when things go sideways. You can use the letter to show that the other party is being inconsistent with the original intent of the parties.

Or if things get really unpleasant, letters can be used as evidence to show what the parties contemplated, assuming no later contract is entered into, or to define ambiguous provisions of the later contract.

Whether or not you do a letter of intent will depend on your relationship with the other party. Consider the cost of having an attorney draft it versus doing it yourself, how long it will take to draft, the anticipated business deal’s duration, and whether or not it would be efficient.

Consider how certain you need to be about the other party’s intent. If you anticipate significant problems, a letter of intent might be a good place to start identifying and working through those problems.

The parties can decide whether or not to make the letter binding. Often, parties choose to make the letter of intent binding until a final contract is executed.

If time is short and your deal seems relatively straightforward, you may want to bypass the letter of intent and focus on drafting and executing a contract.

Mary Luros is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers — or attorneys.

How do you properly fire someone?

Dear Mary, I have a tasting room in Napa and I recently hired an employee who just isn’t working out. I’ve never had to fire anyone before and I’m worried that he’ll somehow come after me for firing him. How do you properly terminate an employee? For what reason can I fire someone?

Firing an employee can be one of the hardest things you will do as a business owner. The second-hardest thing is defending your actions in a wrongful termination lawsuit.

You can minimize the risk of this employee “coming after you” by making sure you treat him fairly throughout the termination process. The most frequent mistakes employers make include lying about the reason for termination, not terminating other employees for the same misconduct or performance issues, terminating for a trivial reason, and terminating someone in violation of the law.

In California, the general rule is that employment is presumed to be terminable “at will,” which means that ongoing employment can be terminated by either party. There are many exceptions to this rule, and generally it’s up to the terminated employee to prove an exception applies based on law, public policy or contract.

There are legal limitations on the employer’s right to terminate, most notably the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, which prohibits termination based on race, color, national origin, ancestry, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), age, physical or mental disability, marital status, sexual orientation, protected medical conditions, or religion. Federal law mimics this law and also prohibits termination based on citizenship or union activity.

California has anti-retaliation and whistleblower statutes, as well as leave of absence statutes, which prohibit employers from disciplining or terminating employees for taking leave for a variety of reasons, including pregnancy, disability, serious health conditions, jury duty, voting, military service and more.

An employer’s right to terminate an employee is also limited by public policy considerations. You can’t threaten termination to coerce the employee into acting against public interest, including committing a crime or concealing a wrongdoing. For example, you can’t threaten to fire your employee unless they testify falsely in your favor, or make them rob a liquor store at gunpoint because you’re thirsty.

Contracts can also limit an employer’s right to terminate employees. You may have an employment agreement that termination will only occur “for good cause.” The employee then has the burden of showing that termination was without good cause. Usually this is done by showing that the employer terminated the employee because of a trivial reason, unrelated to the business needs or goals.

To minimize the risk of wrongful termination claims, make sure that your decision does not violate the law, company policies, or your past practices with employees in similar situations. Ensure that you have all of the proper documentation to support your action and make certain that you carefully draft the notice of termination.

Once you have made sure that all of the appropriate steps have been taken to minimize the risk of litigation, conduct an exit interview and give your employee a chance to be heard.

Mary Luros is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers – or attorneys.

When employees need a hand(book)

Dear Mary, I’m having a hard time with my employees. One of them is going through a divorce and can’t seem to focus on work, and the other one is constantly late and often calls in sick. They have both been with me a long time and I don’t want to fire them, especially given the current economic climate. I’m not interested in their personal issues, but my business is suffering. What’s the best way to handle this?

From a legal standpoint, the best thing you can do to get your employees on track is to set clear standards. It sounds like you either don’t have an employee handbook, or that you aren’t enforcing its terms. Make clear rules, make sure your employees understand the rules and their consequences, and enforce the rules uniformly.

There are several online resources that can help you put together an employee handbook. In general, the handbook should explain what your expectations are for your employees. It should also clarify the employer’s legal obligations and your employees’ legal rights.

You will need to discuss how and when the employee will be compensated and what deductions the company will take. This is a good time to also explain your company’s policy on benefits, overtime pay, bonuses, timecards and breaks. Do not assume that your employee will begin the job understanding the finer points of worker’s compensation and wage and hour laws.

If you are concerned about your employee’s tardiness, now is the time to address punctuality, attendance, and the consequences of missing work. It’s not enough to just say that your employee shouldn’t be late — you must enforce your policies and document incidents that violate the employee handbook. Meet with your employees on a regular basis to discuss and review their performance, attendance and punctuality.

Set clear standards for your employees with regard to their obligations. For example and depending on your specific business, you may want to require that your employees keep client/customer information confidential.

You also need to cover discrimination laws and how both you and your employees are expected to comply with them. There are many other areas you should cover, including employee records, probation, termination, safety and security of the workplace, appropriate computer and software use, vacation policies and much more.

You may want to start with a template that complies with California and federal law and go from there, or you may want to have an attorney review your handbook before you present it to employees.

Sometimes it’s hard to enforce rules with an employee who is suffering serious personal challenges. Setting standards is half the battle; the other half is helping your employee to leave their personal issues outside of the workplace. A business owner I know tells her employees to leave their problems in their car when they show up for work. When they leave the office at the end of the day, their problems will be waiting for them.

Mary Luros is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers — or attorneys.

Buy! Sell! Buy-sell!

Dear Mary, I run a pretty successful two-person business. My wife and I are working on our estate plan and I’m not sure how to handle my partnership interest. I think my partner should just take it over, but I want my wife to benefit also. If something happens to my partner, I don’t think I could work with his wife and I’d rather take over the whole thing. Is this possible?

I strongly recommend that you plan for your business’s future. Often, people invest in drafting wills, trusts, and powers of attorney, but it’s also important to invest in an estate plan for your business.

A popular tool to protect the future of a business is a buy-sell agreement. A “buy-sell” is a binding contract between you and your partner that governs what happens if one of you passes away, and should also address other situations where either of you can’t continue with the business. You can agree now that if one of you passes away, the other can acquire your interest.

The purpose of a buy-sell is to make the transition of ownership run smoothly. Now is the time to anticipate any potential conflicts that could upset the functioning of your business when an owner sells their interest.

You should decide ahead of time how to value the partnership, and what events will trigger a buyout. One of the biggest benefits of a buy-sell is limiting who can obtain an ownership interest in the company.

If you’ve been running your company for 20 years, the last thing you may want is for some young whippersnapper to come in and tell you how he’s going to change everything.

Continuity of management and control is priceless and it’s cheaper to invest in this kind of agreement now. If one of you retires, the other person probably won’t want the retiree to become a “backseat driver” with regard to how the business should run.

Are you concerned that if something happens to your partner you might not be able to afford to buy out his wife? It’s common to fund a buy-sell agreement and the resulting buyout with a life insurance policy. In a common scenario, the company would buy a life insurance policy on each partner and the proceeds would be paid to the surviving spouse (or whomever is the named beneficiary) in exchange for the deceased partner’s share.

Things can get more complicated if you have several owners of a business. Instead of buying multiple policies on one another, you can use what’s called an entity purchase buy-sell agreement, in which there’s one policy for each owner.

Of course, as with any life insurance, there are issues of cost, uninsurability and policy lapse. There are also other ways to fund buy-sell agreements besides insurance.

I recommend hiring a professional to help you draft your buy-sell agreement, if you choose to use one. These agreements can be complicated, and as is true with any business decision, things can get messy when emotions are involved.

Mary Luros is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers — or attorneys.

Defamation vs. Gossip

Dear Mary, There’s an attorney here in town who I think is a jerk. Last week I told a friend that the attorney is a crook and he breaks the law because he thinks he can get away with it. He’s not actually a crook, but I really don’t like him. The attorney found out about what I said and I’m worried about him suing me for defamation. But it’s a free country, I can say whatever I want and what I said was just small-town gossip, right?

The First Amendment is one of the most misunderstood parts of the Constitution. Let me be very clear: You cannot say whatever you want about whomever you want. Generally speaking, defamation is a false statement that is harmful to someone’s reputation. If you knowingly lie about a person’s reputation, or if you should have known it was a lie, you may be liable. “Libel” refers to written defamation, while “slander” refers to a spoken defamation.

In order to prove that someone is defaming you or your business, you must be able to prove that a false statement of fact was communicated to a third person, who understood that remark to be harmful and about you or your business.

In this case, the attorney could say that you knowingly or recklessly lied that he broke the law, when really you knew otherwise. Furthermore, you knew that your friend would believe your statement. The attorney will also say that what you said is harmful to his reputation, as well as his business. An attorney who has a reputation for breaking the law won’t be getting a lot of clients. If people hear “this guy is a crook,” they will skip him and find another lawyer.

The truth is always a defense to a defamation claim. However, proving that something is true can be difficult and expensive. If you can prove that this attorney is indeed a “crook,” and that he breaks the law, you may be able to defeat a defamation suit.

In addition, statements of opinion are not defamatory. If you had said, “I really don’t like that guy and I wouldn’t hire him,” then you probably would have been fine. Coming right out and falsely saying that he’s a crook is defamatory.

A court will also take the purpose and intent of your statement into consideration. Sometimes, the circumstances are such that the statement could not possibly be taken as the truth.

There’s another interesting thing to mention about your situation: If your friend relies on what you said and tells other people that the attorney is a crook, would he be liable for defamation as well? The answer may be yes. Every repetition of defamation is a separate communication and gives rise to a new and separate cause of action.

The lesson to be learned here is that we shouldn’t “gossip” about people or businesses. If something isn’t true, or you aren’t sure, it’s best not to repeat it.

Mary Hudson is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers — or attorneys.

Disclosing trade secrets during a job interview

Dear Mary,

I own a local bakery and I need to hire a cake designer. I’m worried that during the interviews, I’ll have to explain my top-secret cake making methods, and candidates could use that information to start their own bakery, or take a job with a competitor. Confidentiality is really important in my work and I need to know that applicants can keep things private. What can I ask during interviews? How do I talk about my company and still protect my confidential information?

The easiest way to protect trade secrets is with nondisclosure agreements (also known as confidentiality agreements).

During the interview process, a company must often disclose confidential information. An employer may protect the company’s information by requiring applicants to agree in writing that any information disclosed during the interview must be kept confidential.

You must give the applicant the opportunity to read the agreement and consult with counsel. You can’t make them sign it without having a chance to review it. You should also review the confidentiality agreement with the applicant to make sure they understand its terms.

A good way to put this into practice is to include the confidentiality agreement with your application. When an application is submitted, explain your confidentiality policy before you schedule an interview.

An employee interview is the perfect time to explain the importance your company places on protecting confidential information. Explain now what your protective policies are and how you protect third party confidential information.

It’s also helpful to pay attention to the applicant’s attitude about their former employer’s confidential information: If they reveal things that they probably shouldn’t, you know that your confidential information will be treated no differently.

Ask the applicant if they had a nondisclosure agreement with their previous employer. The last thing you want to do is misappropriate another company’s protected trade secrets.

You should also instruct the applicant not to reveal any trade secrets during the interview process or anytime thereafter. If an applicant previously worked for a competitor bakery, do not ask them for their fabulous secret carrot cake recipe, or you could be facing a not-so-sweet lawsuit.

If the applicant displays a willingness to disclose the trade secrets of their former employer, then the former employer may obtain an injunction to keep you from hiring them. The mere intent to disclose trade secrets is considered an actionable threat of trade secret misappropriation.

When you’re hiring new employees, you should really look into whether or not the position might require the inevitable disclosure of trade secrets. If it does, you should consider placing the employee in a position not requiring such disclosure (at least temporarily).

Nondisclosure agreements should be specific about what you want to protect. If your agreement would prohibit an employee from ever owning a bakery, it’s not going to hold up. However, if your agreement specifically cites a recipe or method that you have protected (not just an ordinary recipe to which anyone has access), employees may be forced to use reasonable efforts to protect that confidential information.

Mary Hudson is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers — or attorneys.

Food fight

Dear Mary, I started a local restaurant with my friend and business partner a few months ago and we both agreed to sign non-compete agreements, prohibiting us from opening restaurants in Napa for the next two years.

Now we’re fighting and I want to start a new restaurant on my own (serving the same kind of food). I’ve heard that non-competes are not legal in California . Can I go start my own restaurant?

Probably not. The truth is, you’re correct that non-competes are generally void in California, but there are a couple of exceptions to that rule and I think your situation may fall into one of them.

A non-compete contract is an agreement in which one party agrees not to engage in a similar profession or trade in competition with the other party. Employers often have employees sign non-competes when they are worried that the employee, upon termination, might start working for a competitor or start their own business in the same field, and use confidential information or trade secrets to gain a competitive advantage.

In California, non-competes are generally unenforceable under Section 16600 of the Business and Professions Code. There are two very narrow exceptions to this general rule:

1) A non-compete agreement may be enforceable if it’s made in connection with the sale of the goodwill of a business. An example would be when a person sells a business and agrees to refrain from carrying on a similar business in the same geographic area.

The thinking behind this is that it would be inherently unfair for someone to sell a company and then engage in competition that decreases the value of the asset they just sold.

2) Non-competes may be enforceable when it comes to dissolving a business (or dissociation of a partner from a business). A partner may be required to agree not to carry on a similar business within a geographic area where the partnership is located or has done business, so long as any other member of the partnership carries on a like business.

The reasoning behind this exclusion to the general rule against non-competes is that this kind of agreement gives all partners the opportunity to start anew in business on equal terms.

Non-competes are often used to protect trade secrets. A company can prevent the use of its trade secrets, but it may not prevent fair competition.

A good example is a customer list: a company can prevent a former employee from soliciting clients by using their customer list, but merely informing those customers that the former employee has a new job (without more) is OK.

An employer and an employee cannot agree that a non-compete is valid. If the contract is determined to be void by law and public policy, it cannot be made valid by agreement.

An employee or potential employee cannot legally be terminated (or not hired) for refusing to sign a non-compete. However, many employees agree to sign non-competes, knowing that the agreement is invalid, just to ensure they are hired (or not fired).

Mary Hudson is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers — or attorneys.

Don’t get scammed

Dear Mary, Last year, my business paid to advertise in a sustainability magazine. I gave a credit card deposit for advertising design and placement within the publication. Unfortunately, we didn’t read the contract fully or ask enough questions before signing it. The magazine never came out and our ads never ran — but our credit card was charged over a thousand dollars. How do I know if I’m being scammed and how can I protect myself from future scams?

People often talk about identity theft and the importance of protecting yourself, but many businesses forget to protect themselves from scams. Your situation last year illustrates how important it is to investigate offers and review contracts carefully. You’re not alone—at least seven businesses in Napa reported that magazine scam to the district attorney’s office.

Business scams come in many forms. Some involve bills for advertising or directory listings that were never ordered, suspicious office supply offers, and even false demands from imaginary government agencies.

Here are some common scams to watch for:

• Advertising scams: Small businesses are often deceived into paying for an advertisement or directory listing that does not exist. A scammer might call your business to confirm an advertisement they claim you ordered. They may even quote a genuine ad you placed in a different publication to convince you. When you refuse to pay, they threaten legal action.

• Check overpayment scams: You’re selling something on the Internet, through eBay, Craigslist, etc., and the scammer sends you a check for more than the price. They’ll say there was a mistake and they’ll ask you to refund the excess amount by wire transfer. You wire them the difference and when you go to cash their check (surprise, surprise) it bounces.

• Office supply scams: You get a bill for office supplies you never ordered, never received, or for items that were not what you thought you bought. Often, this scam comes in the form of a phone call from someone claiming to be your regular supplier. Watch for offers of a free gift, which arrives with other goods that were not ordered, for which you will be charged.

• Fax back scams: You receive an unsolicited fax offering a great deal — all you have to do is fax back to a $5/minute telephone number. They’ll make sure your fax goes through — slowly.

• Government scams: When I file articles of organization for an LLC, I receive a very official-looking document from the “Office of the Compliance Recorder” (fake) telling me that if I don’t send them a check for $150 and fill out the “Annual Minutes Disclosure Statement” (also fake), my company will lose limited liability protection (fake). And if I pay $200, they’ll give me immediate processing!

Don’t be a victim. Never give financial details to anyone you don’t trust. Implement clear policies about who is authorized to pay bills or place orders. Most importantly, do not sign anything until you read and understand all of the terms.

If you believe you’ve been scammed, you can fill out a complaint form with the Napa district attorney’s office at countyofnapa.org, or contact their Consumer Affairs Hotline: 253-4059.

Mary Hudson is a business law attorney with Hudson & Luros, LLP, in Napa, and can be reached at mary@hudsonluros.com or 418-5118. The information provided here is not intended as legal advice, nor does it form an attorney-client relationship with the author. The author makes no representations as to the reliability or accuracy of the above information. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need disclaimers — or attorneys.