Will Bankruptcy Allow PG&E to Shirk Responsibility for the Camp Fire?

Last fall, the “Camp Fire” burned over 150,000 acres of land and killed 85 people in Northern California. Although investigators have determined how the fire was started, it is unclear whether the responsible party will be brought to justice. The reason why? They have declared bankruptcy. 

The Fire

Like most other Wisconsinites, who are not accustomed to seeing such horrors in our part of the country, the attorneys in our office were shocked by the news reports and viral video clips from the Camp Fire. Walls of flame devoured everything in their path — including many people who were trapped in their cars. It is still sickening to think of. 

Investigators determined the fire was caused by electrical transmission lines owned and operated by Pacific Gas and Electricity (PG&E). On the hook for billions of dollars in damage, the utility company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection

The Bankruptcy 

When PG&E filed for bankruptcy, it became the largest utility to ever do so. The company is reportedly over $50 billion in debt, not counting the amount it will owe to victims of the Camp Fire under California’s strict fire liability laws. 

When a company is facing this sort of massive, unknown liability, bankruptcy is often the best option — for everyone involved. Why? Our bankruptcy laws require that every creditor be paid if at all possible, while at the same time allowing the business to move forward. 

Perhaps fire victims will not be paid back for 100% of their losses, but allowing PG&E to restructure and continue operating rather than shutting down will ensure they get something.

It is likely that the bankruptcy court will estimate the fire damages, direct PG&E to come up with some percentage of that amount, then require victims to make claims on that fund while barring future lawsuits. 

Not Shirking Their Duty

Companies who file for bankruptcy in the face of lawsuits are not shirking their responsibility to the public. They are taking advantage of the law to create some certainty in an uncertain situation. Filing for bankruptcy hits pause on all other litigation involving the company and pulls some lawsuits into the bankruptcy process. 

Knowing a defendant is bankrupt, or will be if a major verdict comes down against them, incentivizes the potential plaintiffs to negotiate a solution that will allow all plaintiffs — instead of just the first to file — to get some sort of compensation. There’s probably not enough money to compensate everyone fully, especially if the company has lots of other debt, but the bankruptcy process ensures victims are treated fairly and equally. 

It will be interesting to see how the PG&E case moves forward since the amounts at stake are so large. It may also set the precedent for future cases across the country where a man-made natural disaster wreaks havoc. We will be keeping a close eye on it. 

If your business is facing legal debts that may drive it into bankruptcy, Hanson & Payne LLC is ready to advise you and guide you through the process. Contact us today to schedule an initial consultation.

Choosing State or Federal Bankruptcy Exemptions

Wisconsin Bankruptcy

When you file for bankruptcy, you can protect certain property from sale to satisfy your creditors. You do this by classifying the property as “exempt,” meaning it is exempt from the reach of creditors. If you are filing for bankruptcy in Wisconsin, you have the ability to choose whether you want to claim state or federal bankruptcy exemptions. Wisconsin is one of the few states that allows for this and it can be a huge advantage should you weigh out your options and choose wisely.

Choosing State or Federal Bankruptcy Exemptions

With Chapter 13 bankruptcy, you get to retain both exempt and nonexempt property. You will be responsible for paying back property value to your creditors through an established payment plan executed over several years. With Chapter 7 bankruptcy, however, the bankruptcy trustee has the authority to sell the property to satisfy creditors. Property that is eligible to be sold to benefit creditors is called “nonexempt.” “Exempt” property will be protected from sale.

Additionally, if you file Chapter 13 bankruptcy, exemptions can be used in order to reduce the amount of money that you will be required to pay to satisfy your unsecured creditors. If you are concerned about losing specific property in bankruptcy proceedings, there are several strategies you may employ to protect it. One such strategy is through the use of exemptions. In Wisconsin, you not only can choose some property as exempt, but you can choose between the Wisconsin exemption scheme and the federal exemption scheme. The schemes differ in several key respects. Choosing the one that best protects your assets is important. You must choose one scheme or the other. You cannot pick and choose from both the Wisconsin and federal exemption schemes.

Some of the more notable exemptions for those choosing the Wisconsin state scheme include:

  • $75,000 homestead exemption
  • $4,000 motor vehicle exemption
  • $12,000 consumer goods exemption
  • $5,000 savings and checking accounts exemption

These amounts double if you are married and are jointly filing for bankruptcy with your spouse. This is also true for the amounts of notable exemptions in the federal state, which include:

  • $22,975 homestead exemption
  • $3,675 motor vehicle exemption
  • $12,250 household goods exemption
  • $1,225 exemption applicable to anything you own (referred to as the “wild card” exemption

Also, under both schemes, most retirement accounts are fully protected.

Wisconsin Bankruptcy Attorneys Protecting Your Best Interests

You can get through bankruptcy without losing everything. The fact that Wisconsin allows you to choose between federal and state exemptions is a big advantage and it is a significant decision to make, one of many that will present itself in the bankruptcy process. Hanson & Payne, LLC will help you evaluate your options and make sure you are choosing the scheme that maximizes property protection benefits in your individual case. Let our knowledgeable bankruptcy attorneys protect your best interests as you move forward through the bankruptcy process. Contact us today.

Creditors Beware: Attempting To Collect After A Discharge Could Get You In Big Trouble

Although bankruptcy law is federal law, very few bankruptcy cases make it up to the Supreme Court. So, it is notable that the Justices delivered a unanimous decision in a bankruptcy case near the end of the court term that ended in June. In Taggart v. Lorenzen, the High Court made it clear that creditors who attempt to collect a debt after one has been granted a discharge will find themselves in big trouble. 

Taggert v. Lorenzen

Taggart v. Lorenzen is a complex case, as most cases that make their way up to the highest court are. If you are curious about the underlying facts, you can check out this summary from Oyez, or this one from SCOTUSblog. It is the court’s holding that we are going to talk about. 

In an opinion authored by Justice Breyer, the Court held that creditors who try to collect a debt after a discharge can be sanctioned for contempt of court not only if they knew what they were doing was wrong, but also if there was “no objectively reasonable basis” of their understanding of the discharge order or the statutes that govern its scope. 

This ruling has important implications because there are many circumstances where debts survive a bankruptcy discharge and can still be collected. When a debt survives, the creditor may try to collect it, and that is okay. But if a debt has been discharged, the creditor must write it off, and should not, under any circumstances, try to collect. The problem is there are a lot of debts in the gray area that may or may not be discharged, depending on the circumstances. 

A creditor who is owed a debt that may still exist needs to be extra careful and ensure the debt was not discharged before it makes any attempt to collect. Otherwise, the creditor may be found in civil contempt, which means they can be fined by the court. 

Creditors who want to collect debts owed by a person or entity that has filed for bankruptcy would be wise to consult with an experienced bankruptcy attorney. The accuracy of the advice you take could make the difference between collecting a debt and getting charged a hefty and embarrassing fine. 

Contact Our Milwaukee Bankruptcy Lawyer

Our firm has years of experience helping both creditors and debtors navigate the bankruptcy system, so we are in a good position to advise our clients even in tricky gray-area situations. 

Judge Rejects Shopko’s Bankruptcy Plan

On January 16th, Wisconsin based retail chain Shopko filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company reported having less than $1 billion in assets with outstanding liabilities, running somewhere between $1 billion and $10 billion. As part of bankruptcy proceedings, the U.S. Bankruptcy court had Shopko officials, along with creditors, attorneys and other consultants, draft a bankruptcy plan and submit it to the court for approval. Despite most relevant parties expressing approval for the plan, as well as U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Thomas Saladino supporting the effort drafting the plan, Judge Saladino had to ultimately reject it.

Why Was Shopko’s Bankruptcy Plan Rejected?

Under the plan submitted to Judge Saladino, all of Shopko’s bank debt would have been paid off by July. Additionally, the majority of administrative claims would have been paid and a $15.5 million payback from Sun Capital would have been secured. On top of all this, there may have been some money left over to pay some of the unsecured creditors. Why then was this bankruptcy plan rejected by the court? One of the major creditors, McKesson Corporation, told the judge that it had civil fraud claims against no less than four Shopko executives. The plan would have banned all potential claims against Shopko.

McKesson Corp. explained to the bankruptcy court that Shopko executives made false promises in order to keep medication supplies coming to Shopko pharmacies for as long as possible. Shopko never paid for these supplies and McKesson asserts that Shopko owes the company close to $70 million. Although the amount has since been reduced, McKesson maintains that Shopko still owes them $55 million. Furthermore, McKesson alleges that Shopko executives are using the bankruptcy plan to avoid being sued for fraud in Wisconsin. Wisconsin is the company’s state headquarters. Shopko counters by saying McKesson Corp. is being spiteful in holding up the otherwise supported bankruptcy plan.

What are Shopko’s options?

At this point, Shopko has several options in how to proceed. The company may opt to submit another plan. Right now, Shopko has the exclusive right to submit a plan, but this is only for a limited time. If they fail to submit a plan for approval, other parties of the case, including McKesson, could submit their own proposed plans.

Shopko may also want to consider converting the proceedings from chapter 11 bankruptcy to chapter 7. With chapter 11 bankruptcy, there is still a chance that the company could reorganize and continue moving forward. Under chapter 7 bankruptcy, the court would appoint a trustee that would assume control of the company from the executives. Judge Saladino left the decision of how to proceed up to Shopko.

Trusted Bankruptcy Attorneys

No matter your reason for considering bankruptcy, the road ahead may be difficult. There will be countless questions and concerns that will arise. The dedicated Milwaukee bankruptcy attorneys at Hanson & Payne are here to answer your questions and support you throughout the bankruptcy process. Contact us today.

Does Declaring Bankruptcy Eliminate Tax Debt?

“…in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”

— Benjamin Franklin

This quip of Franklin’s is a lasting reminder that Uncle Sam always takes his cut. It was true at the close of the American Revolution, and it remains true now. Not even filing for bankruptcy can help you avoid paying most taxes.

You said “most…”

Whether you can wipe out tax debts by filing for bankruptcy depends on the type of taxes you owe and the type of bankruptcy you file.

Chapter 7

If you are an individual who is eligible to file for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the bankruptcy code, you may be able to get past due federal income taxes forgiven. Other taxes, like state level taxes or payroll taxes cannot be discharged.

In order to have your federal income tax debt discharged, you must be able to show:

  • You did not commit fraud or willfully evade paying your taxes.
  • The debt is at least three years old.
  • You filed a tax return for the debt you wish to discharge at least two years before filing for bankruptcy.
  • The income tax debt was assessed by the IRS at least 240 days before you filed your bankruptcy petition, or was not assessed before you filed. This is known as the “240-day rule.”

Our firm’s experienced bankruptcy attorneys can help you determine if you meet these criteria, and if not, what other options are available to you.

Chapter 11 & Chapter 13

If you don’t qualify for a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, or you are filing on behalf of a business, whether your tax debt is dischargeable is a much more complicated question that can’t be easily summarized in a blog post. If this is the situation you are in, the Hanson & Payne team would be happy to meet with you and advise you.

Other Options

If you are struggling to pay off tax debt, and that is what is pushing you toward bankruptcy, there may be another path you can take.

The IRS is often willing to enter into a repayment plan with taxpayers that cannot afford to pay off all their tax debt in one fell swoop. If you think you can eventually pay off your taxes, this can be a great option. You may, however, still be on the hook for late fees and interest.

If you do not believe you will be able to pay off all of your tax debt, but you could pay off a significant chunk of it right now, or over time, you may want to make what is known as an offer in compromise. This is an agreement to pay a lower amount now instead of the full amount later. The IRS is open to this when it believes the amount you are offering is as much as it can reasonably expect to collect over time. To put it another way, the IRS fears you will not pay up in full, so it will take what it can get.

Get the help you need.

Bankruptcy law and tax law are both complicated. We recommend contacting an experienced bankruptcy law firm if you are even remotely considering filing for bankruptcy because of your tax debt.

Industry Shifts Leading to Bankruptcy

Shifts in industries can often lead to major changes. Supply goes up, demand goes down, other factors come in, and an industry changes as a result. Sometimes, these shifts can cause things like widespread bankruptcy among industry participants. Sometimes, the string of bankruptcy is limited to a specific region. For example, the Wisconsin frac sand industry is in the midst of a major downturn. For a number of reasons, major producers of frac sand in the state are facing closure and bankruptcy.

Wisconsin Frac Sand Producer Faces Bankruptcy as Industry Shifts

Between 2010 and 2015, the frac sand mining industry in Wisconsin rapidly expanded. The state’s plentiful silica sand reserves were a natural draw for mining companies and processing plants. The Department of Natural Resources reports that there 128 frac sand facilities in Wisconsin, but this number may start lowering rapidly. In recent years, frac sand mines have begun popping up closer to the Texas oil fields making things easier for the local drilling costs. The oil drilling companies could get the Texas frac sand for much cheaper because they did not have to pay the shipping costs associated with bringing it in from Wisconsin. While the demand for frac sand, which is used in drilling for oil, is hitting all time highs, the demand for Wisconsin frac sand continues to dwindle. The drop in demand for Wisconsin frac sand led to plummeting prices for the commodity.

The pressure being placed on Wisconsin frac sand producers is already evident in record numbers of SEC filings. The bankruptcy filings are beginning. Recently, Emerge Energy Services LP, the owner of Superior Silica Sands, a major frac sand mining company operating in Wisconsin, is facing bankruptcy The company entered into a debt restructuring agreement with lenders this past April. Pursuant to the agreement, the company’s debt obligations will be cleared in exchange for the lenders becoming majority shareholders in the company. The alternative to this is the company filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Market analysts are confident that more companies will follow suit and estimate that up to 75% of Wisconsin frac sand mines might close. The opening of more Texas mines has led to an oversupply in Wisconsin while the demand for Wisconsin frac sand decreases. There has also been an emergence of frac sand mines in Oklahoma. In the past 18 months alone, more than a dozen mines have appeared in west Texas and Oklahoma. These mines are located near some of the busiest oilfields in the U.S. The Texas mines produce greater than 100 million tons of sand a year. This means that just the Texas mines are producing enough sand to satisfy the estimated annual industry need.  

Experienced Wisconsin Bankruptcy Attorneys

Industry shifts are often the root cause of companies filing for bankruptcy. If your company is in the midst of bankruptcy, Hanson & Payne, LLC is available to answer any of your questions and advise you of your options. What you decide to do now can have a major impact on your future. Contact us today.

D-D-D-Defense Against The Clawback Of Preference Transfers

If one of your customers files for bankruptcy, you can assume that any money they owe you is long gone. If you get paid back anything at all, it will be much delayed and probably pennies on the dollar. That is a well-known risk of doing business without asking for cash on delivery.

A less well-known risk is that money customers pay you will be clawed back if they file for bankruptcy. Payments received from someone who filed bankruptcy less than a year after making that payment to you may be considered “preference transfers.” The bankruptcy trustee can demand that you return such payments to the bankruptcy court so it can determine if you were given preferential treatment by your customer — in other words, getting paid when others were not.

There are several ways to defend yourself against the clawback of a preference transfer, and we have helped our Milwaukee area clients use all of them.

Why Does This Law Exist?

It seems unfair that a business should be punished just because one of its customers has filed for bankruptcy, but the law was actually drafted to combat unfairness. The clawback provisions are intended to prevent some creditors from being treated better than others. Under the law, all of a bankrupt business’ creditors are supposed to be treated equally.

It Still Seems Unfair

If your business is one that got paid and is being asked to give back money that is rightfully yours, you might not agree that the law promotes fairness. Fortunately, there are exceptions to the clawback rule that you may be able to take advantage of. The three most common are (1) the contemporaneous exchange for new value, (2) the subsequent new value and (3) the ordinary course of business defenses.

(1) Contemporaneous Exchange for New Value

Perhaps the most common defense is the contemporaneous exchange for new value defense. It applies when the payment sent to a creditor was intended by both the debtor and creditor to be a contemporaneous exchange for new value, which can include goods, services, credit, or the release of property previously transferred. The important thing is that the money paid was in exchange for something new. The money cannot have been exchanged in order to pay off old debts.

Organizations doing business with debtors who are in financial trouble should make it clear in their bookkeeping that money coming in is being exchanged for something new of value, not paying off past due invoices.

The law works like this because it wants to incentivize companies to keep doing business with troubled organizations in hopes that they can turn things around rather than be forced into bankruptcy.

(2) Subsequent New Value

This defense is only slightly different from the previously discussed defense. In order to claim the subsequent new value defense, the creditor must have given something of value to the debtor after a payment from the debtor was received. Once again, this exception was drafted in order to incentivize the continuation of business relationships in situations where the creditor could easily have been pushed into bankruptcy sooner.

(3) Ordinary Course of Business

This defense applies when the payment subject to clawback was received in the ordinary course of business between the creditor and debtor. In order to take advantage of this defense, the creditor must be able to show that its relationship with the debtor did not change in the time period leading up to the debtor’s bankruptcy filing. No special payments were received, things were just going along like they usually did.

Experience You Can Trust

Our firm has helped many Milwaukee area businesses take advantage of these and other exceptions to the preference transfer law. In our experience, the sooner a creditor acts after being notified of a potential clawback the better. However, it is never too late to try and protect the money you are rightfully owed from flowing into someone else’s pocket. Whether you have just been notified your business was doing business with someone who has filed for bankruptcy, or you have already been asked to return a payment flagged as a preference transfer, don’t hesitate to contact our office and find out what your options are.

Nursing Homes in Receivership Highlight Another Non-Bankruptcy Option

When a business is struggling to stay afloat, and there is a good reason to keep its operations running instead of shutting it down, putting the business in receivership may be an option. Right now, there are several nursing homes in Wisconsin making headlines for their decision to go into receivership. They provide a good example of how the whole process works.

Eight More Wisconsin Nursing Homes Go Into Receivership

This spring, eight skilled nursing facilities — aka nursing homes — run by a company called Dycora Transitional Health & Living were placed into receivership. The facilities will all remain open for the time being, but they will be operated by another company while a buyer is sought. Unless something comes up, the residents will not have to move out and the employees who work there will continue to get paid.

According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “Dycora is the third company to have its Wisconsin nursing homes placed in receivership in roughly the past two years… In September, Atrium Health and Senior Living reached an agreement with its lender to have a receiver appointed for 23 nursing homes and nine assisted living centers in Wisconsin and one nursing home in Michigan. Similarly, the Fortis Management Group reached a similar agreement with its landlord to have a receiver appointed for its 65 nursing homes and assisted living centers in six states, including 28 in Wisconsin, in July 2017.

The crush of receiverships, and in other instances closures, is blamed on Wisconsin’s low Medicaid reimbursement rate.

How Does Receivership Work?

Receivership is an alternative to bankruptcy. Instead of winding things down and selling off assets through the bankruptcy process, the business stays open but makes it clear that it is in trouble and is looking for someone else to take over its operations.

A company placed into receivership has a person known as a receiver appointed by the courts. The receiver can pay employees and vendors, and hire someone to keep the business running while looking for a buyer.

Receivership is an attractive option for the business owner, who would otherwise be forced to file for bankruptcy. Compared to bankruptcy, a receivership is cheaper, and it is a faster way to sell off a business.

When the business is providing an important service, as a nursing home does, receivership makes sense from a public good perspective. The employees will continue to get paid, and the people in the facilities will continue to be cared for. If the business filed for bankruptcy or shut down, the residents would be at risk of losing their home and not being properly cared for, and the employees would lose their jobs.

Buyers may be interested in purchasing a business in receivership because the company is selling for a good price, and because they can theoretically turn a profit more quickly by buying a business that is already up and running.

Not An Option For Everyone

Going into receivership is not an option for every troubled business. Winding down operations or going into bankruptcy is better in some circumstances, and negotiating a workout is better in others. What options are available to your business depend on the situation you are in. If you would like to find out what paths forward are open to your business, please contact our experienced team at Hanson & Payne, LLC to schedule an initial consultation.

Receivership as an Alternative to Bankruptcy

In Wisconsin, Chapter 128 is a bankruptcy alternative referred to as “receivership.” While many businesses and organizations file for Chapter 11 or even Chapter 13 bankruptcy, receivership can be a nice alternative. Receivership offers the benefit of more limited court appearances and other paperwork than what is involved in bankruptcy. Additionally, a business in receivership can potentially salvage the business through restructuring. Receivership is not, however, a viable alternative to bankruptcy for all businesses in financial distress.

What is Receivership?

Pursuant to Chapter 128, a court-appointed receiver is put in control of all assets, properties, and obligations of an organization. The receiver will comb through the business’s financial records in an attempt to find out the reason for the insolvency. Additionally, the receiver will notify all creditors of the business that it has gone into receivership.

A receiver may also be charged with continued operation of the business if it would be in the best interest of the creditors. If continued operation of the business is best, a receiver may choose to appoint an operating agent who will be tasked with managing the day-to-day dealings of the business. In most cases, the business will continue operations until it is sold off in a process comparable to an auction. The proceeds from the company’s sale are used to satisfy the debts, both secured and unsecured, of the company. The fact that the company has continued to operate throughout the restructuring and sale process makes the transition in ownership that much smoother.

In some cases, the business may be able to be rehabilitated. The receiver may be able to pinpoint the reason that the business has gone into a debt crisis and restructure the company accordingly. If the receiver can find a way to dig the business out of debt and restructure it so that it can become profitable once again, then the business may not need to be sold off. Some liquidation of the assets, however, may still be necessary in order to pay off the business debts. The receiver may also negotiate reductions in debt payment with creditors. Typically, a receiver will have more flexibility than a bankruptcy trustee would have in coming up with ways to pay of the debts of the business.

The receiver may opt for a third option beyond sale or rehabilitation of the company. In some cases, the business may be liquidated. The receiver will be in charge of managing the sale of company assets which can be heavily discounted in order to get the money needed to pay off some financial obligations. It is still possible that not all creditors will be properly compensated.

Wisconsin Bankruptcy Attorneys Protecting Your Best Interests

Bankruptcy can be a necessary path to dealing with times of financial turmoil. It is not always the best way and it can be a difficult time while you are deciding whether it is the right path for you. At Hanson & Payne, LLC, we are here to help you through the decision making process. We will walk you through all of your options. Whether bankruptcy is best for you or an alternative such as receivership, we are here to answer your questions. Contact us today.

Does Filing For Bankruptcy Protect A Business From Lawsuits?

News reports say Purdue Pharma, the maker of popular painkiller OxyContin, is contemplating bankruptcy in response to the many lawsuits (including one filed by Waukesha County) that have named it as one of the parties responsible for the opioid epidemic. Bankruptcy seems to be a common among companies facing big lawsuits, but is avoiding liability really one of the benefits of filing for bankruptcy?

A Common Occurrence

Purdue Pharma is not the first company to consider filing for bankruptcy in the face of potentially crippling liability. The utility company PG&E filed for bankruptcy earlier this year after it was blamed for several devastating wildfires.

Late last year, USA Gymnastics filed bankruptcy in an effort to manage the many claims made against it by gymnasts who allege the organization’s former medical coordinator, Larry Nasser, sexually abused or assaulted them under the guise of medical treatment.

Asbestos maker Johns Manville is credited by many with starting this trend back in 1982, when that company filed for bankruptcy after it was revealed its asbestos products caused mesothelioma.

These businesses and organizations all realized they needed to do something drastic if they wanted answer all the legal claims against them, and perhaps continue to operate. Bankruptcy was their only hope.

Bankruptcy Is A Legal Pause Button

Pretty much everyone is aware that filing for bankruptcy can shield a business from its creditors, but that shield is much more powerful than many people realize.

When a business (or a person) files for bankruptcy, the court issues what is known as a stay. The stay stops all other lawsuits the filer is involved with in their tracks. Creditors cannot collect, adversaries cannot continue discovery, all legal actions are paused. They can only start up again with the permission of the bankruptcy judge.

When a pending or potential legal action might jeopardize a filer’s ability to reorganize under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code, and lead the business to shut down, the bankruptcy judge can pull that litigation into the bankruptcy case and work out a solution.

Often, business assets and insurance proceeds are pooled and put into a trust that potential plaintiffs can make claims against. This puts most potential plaintiffs in a better position than they would be in if the company went out of business, or they had to wait until all of the filer’s other creditors were paid off. It also encourages more plaintiffs to come forward since the claims process is typically well-publicized and much simpler than going to court. And it benefits the fieler by reducing the uncertainty of litigation.

Once the uncertainty of costly litigation is dealt with, the filer can use the Chapter 11 process to reorganize and move forward.

A Tough Choice

Businesses who chose to file for bankruptcy when costly litigation threatens to put them out of business are taking a risk. Going through bankruptcy is not easy. It puts intense scrutiny on your business or organization, and forces leadership to make tough choices. However, it may be the best option if litigation costs are mounting.