Dental Partnership Checklist

nat rosasco • January 16, 2019

Like a marriage, the early days of a dental partnership can be exciting and new, with each participating dentist working together to build the foundation of a long term relationship. Unfortunately, like many marriages dental partnerships often end in divorce, and if the partners have failed to adequately plan for the day their “marriage” comes to an end, that divorce can be an ugly, emotionally draining experience that will cost both partners a small fortune and have a negative impact on the value of the practice. A successful dental partnership is one that has been well thought out in advance with concrete, written procedures that act as a “pre-nuptial” agreement as to how the dental partnership will be dissolved in the event the partners can no longer work together.



The following is a “Dental Partnership Checklist” that any dentist should review prior to engaging in discussions with another dentist regarding a dental partnership.


1.     Cultural Fit, Practice Philosophy and Partnership Objectives: A dentist once described his partner’s work as “fast food dentistry” while he practiced “fine dining dentistry”. Before entering into any dental partnership, you need to be sure you share the same values as your partner, that you approach practicing dentistry in a similar manner, and that you are on the same page in terms of practice goals, time horizon, and financial needs.


2.     Duties, Compensation, and Benefits: One of the most significant areas of tension we encounter in dental partnerships is the failure of one partner to meet expectations regarding the amount of time expected to dedicate to the practice. A dentist recently approached us about exiting a partnership. He had joined another dentist in a practice, only to find out a short time later that the partner dentist opened another office and therefore couldn’t dedicate the amount of time expected to the partner practice. Be sure to put in writing what each partner’s duties, compensation and benefits will be for and from the dental practice. While each partner is an owner, they should also be treated as an employee, with defined duties, compensation, and benefits. Any failure to satisfy those duties and obligations should trigger real consequences, such as a buyout right by the other dental partner.


3.     Contributions of Capital and Distributions from the Dental Partnership: Be sure to clearly define who is contributing what to the dental practice, and how each partner will be compensated. Will each partner dentist receive compensation based on a formula? How will the remaining profit be split up? What if there is a loss at the end of the year, who and how will it be made up? These are only a few of the many questions to be answered regarding how the dental practice income will be allocated and distributed. Each unique partnership arrangement requires careful thought and specific planning to ensure the partners intention is carried out in the event of a disagreement or change in circumstances.


4.     Management Authority and Dispute Resolution: Who makes the decisions in your dental practice may be driven by economics. If you are a young dentist buying in to an existing dental practice, management control may be something you cede to the elder dentist, but for “50/50” dental partnerships this can be a touchy subject. What happens if you don’t agree on buying a major piece of equipment, remodeling the office, or opening a second location? Providing clear authority for day-to-day management and a concrete written procedure to resolve disputes regarding more significant financial and management issues can save a dental partnership. There are a myriad of methods to resolve disputes so be sure to ask your attorney what is best for your dental partnership.


5.     Exiting the Partnership: One of the most challenging circumstances to address legally in most dental practices that are structured as “50/50” partnerships is clearly defining the method and terms of an exit. The easy situations to deal with are death, disability and retirement, where triggers are generally definitive and valuation formulas can be applied in a straightforward manner. The real challenge is the case where the partners just don’t get along anymore and can’t agree on a way for one partner or the other to exit. Most advisors fail to address this most important issue, but it can be the most costly both financially and professionally. With some careful forethought and frank discussions facilitated by your legal, tax and financial advisors you can avoid this pitfall.


While all of the above matters are important to address in any dental partnership, the most important is to get it in writing! All the best planning amounts to nothing years down the road if you fail to get your partnership agreement in writing so you, your advisors, or, in the worst case scenario, a court or arbitrator can refer to it in issuing a decision in your partnership dissolution. You may think you are saving a few bucks by making a handshake deal, but it will cost you thousands down the road if you end up in a dispute with your partner.


Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his expertise as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise dentists and other business owners in the Chicago area. This blend of legal and business experience provides Mr. Uditsky with unique insight into his client engagements, which in addition to dentists also includes a variety of corporate and transactional matters, real estate, and commercial finance. Mr. Uditsky grew up in a dental family, with his father, grandfather and sister each owning their own dental practices.

By Jordan Uditsky January 4, 2022
An amendment to the Mechanics Lien Act (the "Act') permits the bonding over of mechanic's liens in the State of Illinois. The bill was signed into law ( 770 ILCS 60/38.1 ) on July 28, 2015, and went into effect on January 1, 2016. This statute is significant because it allows parties to "clear title" to real property that would otherwise be subject to a mechanic's lien. An eligible applicant will be permitted to substitute a bond for the real property subject to the underlying mechanic's lien so that the lien attaches to the bond instead of the real property. Who is Eligible? To take advantage of 770 ILCS 60/38.1 , the party desiring to bond over the lien must be an eligible applicant. The statute defines applicant relatively broadly to include the following parties: An owner; Other lien claimant; A party that has an interest in the property subject to the lien claim; An association representing owners organized under any statute or to which the Common Interest Community Association Act applies; or Any person who may be liable for the payment of the lien claim, including an owner, former owner, association representing owners organized under any statute or to which the Common Interest Community Association Act applies, or the contractor or subcontractor. Process for Filing a Petition To effectively substitute the bond for the real property, the applicant must file a petition with the clerk of the circuit court in the county where the property subject to the underlying lien claim is located. The petition must include the following: The name and address of the applicant and the applicant's attorney, if any; The name and address of the lien claimant; If there is a pending action to enforce the claim, the name of the attorney of record, or if there is no pending claim, but the claim has been recorded, the name of the preparer of the lien claim; The name and address of the owner of record of any real estate subject to the claim or the name and address of the homeowners association or the condominium association; A legal description of the property; A copy of the lien claim; A copy of the proposed eligible surety bond; A certified copy of the surety's certificate of authority from the Department of Insurance or the state agency charged with the duty to issue the certificate; and An undertaking by the applicant to replace the bond with another eligible surety bond in the event that the proposed eligible surety bond ceases to be an eligible bond. After filing a proper petition, the applicant must provide notice and a copy of the petition, either by personal service or certified mail, to every party whose name and address is stated in the petition and the lien party's attorney of record. Jordan Uditsky, an accomplished businessman and seasoned attorney, combines his experience as a legal counselor and successful entrepreneur to advise business owners in the Chicago area.
By Lou Chronowski November 10, 2021
“Pandemic Impact? - New York Federal Court Allows Termination Dispute to Proceed” 
By Lou Chronowski October 19, 2021
Welcome to GHU’s newest blog – On the Move: The Future is Now! This blog focuses on legal and policy issues facing the vehicle industry. The future is now for the vehicle industry. Some states (CA and MA) have issued mandates requiring that vehicle manufacturers stop selling new ICE (internal combustion engine) vehicles by 2035. Most legacy vehicle manufacturers have made various announcements stating that their respective product portfolios will move from ICE to zero emission vehicles (EVs) over the next 10-14 years. Another significant issue facing the issue relates to how vehicles are purchased. Over the past several years, Tesla has charted a distribution model that rejects traditional dealerships and uses direct sales and service. Other EV manufacturers like Rivian and Lucid appear to be headed in a similar direction. It is well known that Apple and Amazon have plans to enter the vehicle space as well. Consumers will have a large role in determining how they want to purchase vehicles and vehicle services (much the same as they did with respect to on-demand transportation with the likes of Uber and Lyft). The question is whether traditional manufacturers will be kept on an uneven playing field with these newer market entrants. Finally, autonomous vehicles (AVs) are right around the corner as well. In addition to consumer adoption and acceptance of EVs, it is still unknown how consumers will react to AVs and whether AVs have a large role in America. The future is now. The changes in the industry are happening now and happening at fast pace. This blog will continue to explore issues facing the vehicle industry. For 20 years, Lou Chronowski has represented motor vehicle manufacturers helping them navigate complex laws and regulations and litigating disputes against dealers. If you have any questions, please contact Lou at lchronowski@ghulaw.com .
Show More