Full-Service Law Firm solving complex challenges through bold thinking, precise execution, and shared purpose.

Full Service Law Firm | Michael Best & Friedrich LLP

Specializing in the Intersection of Business &amp; Government

Meet our team of trusted advisors, strategic thinkers, and community builders dedicated to client success.

Learn about our full-service legal and business solutions, designed to address complex challenges for leading organizations across industries.

Access thought leadership, news, and resources to stay informed about the latest trends, legal developments, and industry innovations.

Discover how partnership, bold thinking, and precise execution drive results for clients nationwide.

Explore how our national reach and local expertise support clients across the United States and beyond.

Grow at a firm designed to bring out your best.

Most Wisconsin business owners review their finances every month.Their operating agreement? That gets reviewed almost never — until something forces it.A partner wants out. A key employee takes everything they know straight to a competitor. A co-owner dies unexpectedly and no one is sure what happens next. The business they built together suddenly has to be held together by documents that were drafted over a weekend five years ago and haven't been touched since.I've spent fifteen years in litigation and in the operating side of business law. The agreements that fail in a dispute almost always fail in predictable ways — with warning signs that a second set of eyes would have caught before anything went wrong.Here are the five red flags I find most consistently when I review operating agreements, partnership documents, and employment contracts for Wisconsin business owners.<h2 style="margin-left: 0">Red Flag #1 — The Agreement Hasn't Been Updated Since the Business Changed</h2>The single most common problem I see isn't bad drafting. It's an agreement that was fine when it was written — and then the business changed, and the document didn't.A company that started with two equal partners has a third partner now. A revenue split that made sense at $300K in annual revenue doesn't reflect the reality at $3M. A managing member role has shifted from one person to another, but the operating agreement still has the original person in charge.When a dispute arises, the document that gets interpreted is the one that exists — not the one you thought you had. If your operating agreement still reflects the structure of the business in year one and you're now in year six, you have an exposure you may not know about.The fix is straightforward: a periodic review, ideally annual, to confirm that what the document says matches how the business actually operates. It's the kind of thing that takes a few hours to do right and can take years to undo when it isn't done at all.<figure class="image"><img src="https://files.passle.net/Passle/5f6edd8e8cb62a0bec3e5fd2/MediaLibrary/Images/2026-05-28-14-25-53-843-6a185071fc4d48c37d3aa110.jpg" alt="Woman's hand writing signature on a formal document during a property transaction, with car keys and a smart phone on wooden desk, symbolizing new ownership"></figure><h2 style="margin-left: 0">Red Flag #2 — Ambiguity in the Language That Matters Most</h2>Ambiguity is not a neutral condition in a business agreement. When two parties read the same clause and reach different conclusions about what it means, the ambiguity gets resolved in litigation — and courts can interpret ambiguous language in the way that least favors the party trying to enforce it or that drafted it.The places ambiguity shows up most often:Buyout provisions — what triggers a buyout, how the business is valued when it happens, and who controls the process. Vague language here turns an uncomfortable conversation into a contentious legal proceeding.Decision-making authority — what decisions require unanimous consent versus a simple majority, and what happens when the vote is tied. A deadlock provision that says "the parties will work it out" is not a deadlock provision.Compensation and distribution splits — what the members are entitled to, when they're entitled to it, and what happens if the business doesn't have the cash to pay it. Vague distribution language is one of the most common sources of partnership disputes I see.The principle I apply when I review these documents: if you and your partner could read the same clause and reach different conclusions, that clause needs to be rewritten before something forces you to find out who's right.<h2 style="margin-left: 0">Red Flag #3 — No Non-Compete or a Non-Compete That Won't Hold Up</h2>Wisconsin enforces non-compete agreements — but Wisconsin courts scrutinize them. An agreement that isn't drafted with Wisconsin law in mind, or that covers territory broader than reasonably necessary to protect the specific business interest at stake, is not the protection you think it is.The most common problems I see:The agreement covers everyone, regardless of role. A non-compete that applies to a part-time receptionist the same way it applies to your lead injector or your head of operations is both over-broad and practically unenforceable for the positions where it actually matters.The agreement was signed at hire and never updated. An employee who moved from an entry-level role to a senior position with access to your key relationships, your pricing, and your proprietary processes is not adequately covered by the agreement they signed when they had none of that access.There's no non-solicitation provision. Non-solicitation agreements — covering your clients, your suppliers, and your other employees — are a separate protection from non-competes. A key account manager who leaves and takes your three largest accounts to a competitor is a non-solicitation problem. If your agreements don't draw that distinction, you may find yourself without recourse.If your key employees have access to information or relationships that your business genuinely depends on, the agreements that govern those relationships deserve a review.<h2 style="margin-left: 0">Red Flag #4 — The Buy-Sell Agreement Is Missing or Outdated</h2>If you have a business partner, you need a buy-sell agreement that actually works. Not a provision buried in an operating agreement that nobody has looked at since it was drafted — an agreement that addresses what happens when one of you wants out, when one of you can no longer participate, or when one of you dies.The buy-sell agreement questions that tend to go unanswered:How is the business valued when a buyout is triggered? "Fair market value" without a defined process for determining it is not a workable answer when partners disagree on what the business is worth.Who funds the buyout, and how? A business worth $3M and a partner who wants out immediately requires a funding mechanism — life insurance, a payment plan, or a third-party buyer. Without one, the buyout stalls and the business suffers while it does.What restrictions apply to transferring ownership to an outside party? If a partner can sell their interest to someone you've never met without your consent, your operating agreement has a problem.A buy-sell agreement that was written when the business was worth $500K may not be adequate now that it's worth $5M. The time to discover that is before someone triggers it — not after.<h2 style="margin-left: 0">Red Flag #5 — The Most Expensive Five Words in Business</h2>In fifteen years of reviewing agreements that were never meant to be tested, I've heard the same explanation more times than I can count."We'll figure that out later."The partnership structure that wasn't fully formalized because they trusted each other. The equity arrangement that was agreed on verbally and never documented. The decision-making framework that was going to be addressed in the next version of the operating agreement — the one that was never drafted."We'll figure that out later" is not a legal structure. It is a deferred conversation that turns into a crisis when the relationship changes, the business grows, or someone wants out.I am not suggesting that every agreement needs to be a 40-page document. I am suggesting that the agreements governing your business's most consequential relationships — your partnership, your key employment arrangements, your succession plan — should reflect what you've actually agreed to, in writing, before anything forces the conversation.The business owners who navigate disputes, departures, and transitions most cleanly are the ones who had those conversations before they needed to. Not because they expected things to go wrong, but because they knew that the cost of clarity was lower than the cost of finding out the hard way what their documents were missing.<figure class="image"><img src="https://files.passle.net/Passle/5f6edd8e8cb62a0bec3e5fd2/MediaLibrary/Images/2026-05-28-14-26-14-596-6a185086b467c5c9830cf651.jpg" alt="Business people, hands and pointing on contract for legal documents, application and agreement in office. Pen, closeup and person explain paperwork for policy, form or deal in workplace or company"></figure><h3 style="margin-left: 0">When to Have Your Agreements Reviewed</h3>You don't need a dispute to justify having your agreements reviewed. You need a business that has changed since they were drafted — and most businesses have.Here are the moments that typically warrant a fresh look:You've brought on a new partner or changed ownership structure. You've added a significant new employee — someone with access to relationships, processes, or information your business depends on. Your revenue or the nature of your business has changed materially. Your operating agreement is more than two or three years old and hasn't been touched. You're starting to think about what an eventual exit or succession might look like.If any of these apply, the review is worth doing now — not when something forces it.If any of the red flags above sound familiar — if you're not sure when your agreements were last reviewed, or if your business has gone through changes your documents don't reflect —<a href="https://adamwitkov.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> reach out directly and we'll find a time to talk.</a><div class="passle-featured-image passle-featured-image-position-bottom"><img src="https://images.passle.net/fit-in/400x400/filters:crop(0,0,856,482)/Passle/5f6edd8e8cb62a0bec3e5fd2/MediaLibrary/Images/2026-05-28-14-28-02-735-6a1850f26c409a78e21b1919.png" alt="Featured Image" /></div>

Five Red Flags in Business Agreements That Most Owners Never See Coming

Related People

You may also be interested in these

Leveraging Artificial Intelligence to Enhance Client Service at Michael Best

IEEPA Refund Litigation Update: Government takes “No Lawsuit, No Refund” Position for Certain Entries

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Exemption for Last-Mile Workers

Related People

You may also be interested in these

Leveraging Artificial Intelligence to Enhance Client Service at Michael Best

IEEPA Refund Litigation Update: Government takes “No Lawsuit, No Refund” Position for Certain Entries

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Exemption for Last-Mile Workers

Slide Menu

Slide Search