Jacksonville, Fla. – August 6, 2013 – Attorney Charles Jimerson joins fellow Jimerson & Cobb attorneys Christopher Cobb and James Birr in the distinction of certification by The Florida Bar in construction law. Jimerson earned this recognition for having the highest standards of skills, special knowledge, proficiency, professionalism and ethics […]
When a debtor files a bankruptcy action, creditors may or may not have the opportunity to file a proof of claim evidencing the amount owed to the creditor on the date the bankruptcy action was filed. The court sets a deadline for filing the proof of claim, to which all creditors must strictly adhere. But what if a creditor misses the deadline? Is all hope lost, or is there a mechanism to still get the claim in and receive a portion of any distribution? Well, whether an untimely claim is valid or not really turns on notice.
For construction entities participating in the competitive bidding process, it is very important to be able to timely issue spot impermissible arbitrary contract awards or improper solicitations based on flawed specifications that merit immediate protest. The fundamental analysis can be boiled down to simple questions, such as:
• Were the bid specifications reasonably specific?
• Was the winner responsive and responsible?
• Was there fraud or misconduct in the bidding process?
• Has the winning bidder been given an unfair economic advantage that merits reconsideration?
• Does the action prevent the public entity from making an equal comparison of responses to the bidding solicitation?
• Has there been substantial compliance with the bidding procedures?
• Did the agency act arbitrary?
Beyond those questions, this Blog post seeks to identify the Top 10 most common grounds in which Florida procedural or substantive bid protests are based upon.
James Birr were both featured in the fall publication of the University of North Florida Journal.
This Blog is Part VI in a series of Blogs designed to provide business owners with a high-level overview of the legal process for collecting on past-due accounts receivables. Specifically, Part VI focuses on garnishing a debtor’s employer for a portion of the debtor’s salary or wages in order to satisfy the outstanding judgment debt.
Featured in the July 2013 Issue Partner’s Perspective J&C Named of the Fastest-Growing Companies in Jacksonville New Law Blogs Curiosities, Ruminations and Various Eccentricities of Firm Biz Click to read.
This Blog is Part V in a series of Blogs designed to provide business owners with a high-level overview of the legal process for collecting on past-due accounts receivables. Specifically, Part V focuses on garnishing a debtor’s bank accounts in order to satisfy the outstanding judgment debt.
It is common knowledge that when a company or individual files for bankruptcy, all collection activity stops. What is commonly not known is that condominium assessments are, in a manner of speaking, exempt from that rule. The fact is, all collection activity does not have to stop and you can still recover assessments that come due after the bankruptcy action is filed. Let’s read on to see exactly how all this works.
Jimerson Birr, P.A. was named one of Jacksonville’s Fastest-Growing Companies of 2013 by the Jacksonville Business Journal.
This Blog is Part IV in a series of Blogs designed to provide business owners with a high-level overview of the legal process for collecting on past-due accounts receivables. Specifically, Part IV focuses on various methods of post-judgment discovery that a creditor can use for locating assets of the debtor to satisfy the judgment.