Strategic Legal Counsel for Businesses, Entrepreneurs & Financial Institutions
Bean, Kinney & Korman provides comprehensive legal services across the full spectrum of business and financial law throughout Maryland, Virginia, and the Washington, D.C. region. We advise founders, executives, boards, lenders, investors, and nonprofit leaders on the legal strategies that support formation, growth, financing, restructuring, and successful exits.
Our attorneys combine sophisticated transactional experience with practical business judgment. Whether launching a new venture, negotiating complex commercial agreements, securing capital, navigating regulatory compliance, or managing financial distress, we deliver clear, strategic counsel designed to protect value and reduce risk.
We serve closely held and middle-market companies, emerging growth ventures, nonprofit and exempt organizations, financial institutions, investment sponsors, and established enterprises seeking efficient, responsive, and forward-thinking legal solutions.
- Comprehensive Business & Financial Legal Services
Our Business & Financial Services practice integrates multiple disciplines that modern organizations rely on throughout their lifecycle:
- Entity Formation & Structuring
- Start-Up Advice
- Business Planning & Governance
- Bankruptcy, Restructuring & Creditors’ Rights
- Nonprofit & Exempt Organization Law
- Finance & Capital Markets
- Franchising
- Commercial Contracts
- Investment Funds
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- UCC & Commercial Law
- Tax Law
We focus not only on solving legal issues but anticipating them — helping clients structure operations, manage risk, and position their organizations for long-term success.
- Who We Represent
Our Business & Financial Services team represents:
- Entrepreneurs and founders
- Government contractors and federal subcontractors
- Real estate developers and property investors
- Regional and community banks
- Private lenders and credit funds
- Nonprofit and tax-exempt organizations
- Closely held and family-owned businesses
- Professional services firms
- Construction companies
- Investment sponsors and private funds
We tailor our legal strategies to each client’s industry, growth stage, and risk profile.
- Industries Served
Our attorneys regularly advise clients across a diverse range of industries, including:
- Government contracting and federal procurement
- Real estate and commercial development
- Construction and infrastructure
- Technology and professional services
- Healthcare and regulated industries
- Hospitality and franchising
- Financial services and private lending
- Nonprofit and mission-driven organizations
By understanding the regulatory, operational, and economic realities of these sectors, we provide practical legal guidance aligned with real-world business objectives.
- Frequently Asked Questions About Business & Financial Law
What does a business attorney do?
A business attorney provides legal guidance at every stage of a company’s lifecycle — from entity formation and governance to financing, contracts, compliance, restructuring, and mergers or acquisitions. Strategic counsel helps reduce liability exposure, protect assets, structure transactions properly, and ensure regulatory compliance.
When should a company hire a business lawyer?
Companies benefit most from legal counsel early — before formation, when entering into significant contracts, raising capital, hiring executives, restructuring debt, or preparing for a transaction. Early legal planning prevents costly disputes, compliance failures, and tax inefficiencies later.
What type of entity is best for a new business?
The optimal entity structure depends on liability considerations, tax objectives, ownership composition, and long-term growth plans. Options may include limited liability companies (LLCs), corporations (C-Corp or S-Corp), partnerships, or nonprofit entities. Proper structuring supports asset protection, operational flexibility, and tax efficiency.
How can legal structuring impact financing and growth?
Well-structured governance documents, capitalization tables, and compliance frameworks increase investor confidence and lender security. Clear operating agreements and shareholder protections reduce disputes and streamline future capital raises or transactions.
What is involved in business restructuring?
Business restructuring may include debt renegotiation, operational reorganization, recapitalization, asset sales, or formal bankruptcy proceedings. Effective restructuring strategies preserve enterprise value, protect creditor rights, and stabilize operations while minimizing litigation risk.
How does a lawyer support mergers and acquisitions?
M&A counsel manages due diligence, transaction structuring, negotiation of purchase agreements, regulatory compliance, and tax planning. Skilled representation reduces post-closing liability and ensures the transaction aligns with strategic objectives.
What legal services do nonprofit organizations require?
Nonprofits require formation guidance, tax-exemption applications, governance structuring, fundraising compliance, regulatory reporting, and board advisory support. Ongoing counsel ensures compliance while supporting mission-driven growth.
What are UCC and secured transaction issues?
UCC matters involve secured lending, lien perfection, priority disputes, and enforcement rights. Businesses and lenders rely on legal counsel to ensure secured transactions are properly documented, enforceable, and compliant with applicable law.
Why is tax planning critical for businesses?
Tax planning affects entity selection, transaction structure, executive compensation, investment strategy, and exit planning. Strategic tax counsel enhances profitability, reduces exposure, and supports long-term enterprise value.
Do small and mid-sized businesses need ongoing legal counsel?
Yes. Even closely held companies face evolving regulatory, employment, financing, and contractual obligations. Ongoing legal support helps prevent disputes, manage risk, and position the company for growth, investment, or sale.
Representative Matters
Atlantic Funding Corp v. Peterson, 00-1807, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 15996 at *1 (4th Cir. July 18, 2001)
View document (PDF)Auto. Fin. Corp. v. Bayramov, No. 24-1075, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 12562 (4th Cir. May 24, 2024)
View document (PDF)Berrios v. Circle Group, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192900 (E.D. Va. Sept. 25, 2020); 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 225895 (E.D. Va. July 21, 2020)
Brenco Enterprises, Inc. et. al v. Takeout Taxi Franchising Systems, Inc. et al, No. 177164, 2003 Va. Cir. LEXIS 86 at *1 (May 2, 2003)
View document (PDF)Colonial Beach Yacht Ctr., Inc. v. United States, 700 F. Supp. 2d 774 (E.D. Va. March 23, 2010)
Disco, Inc. v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Am., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 227781 (E.D. Va. March 22, 2017)
Ellis v. James V. Hurson Associates, Inc., 565 A.2d 615 (D.C. 1989)
View document (PDF)Family Fed. Sav. & Loan v. Davis (In re Davis), 172 B.R. 437 (Bankr. D.D.C. 1994)
View document (PDF)Garcia v. Suda, 94 Va. Cir. 246 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2016)
View document (PDF)Garcia v. Suda, No. 1:15-cv-01000, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 194373 (E.D. Va. July 1, 2016)
View document (PDF)George & Co., LLC v. Imagination Entm’t Ltd., 575 F.3d 383 (4th Cir. 2009)
Lead counsel for the appellee and argued the appeal for the appellee before the Fourth Circuit. The court found that a trademark based upon an abbreviation (acronym) was not infringed by the use of a longer phrase from which abbreviation was derived. The court also found that there was no confusion caused by the appellee’s use of larger descriptive phrase from which the appellant’s trademark abbreviation was based.
Gold v. Gateway Bank, F.S.B., No. 12-1935, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 11084, at *1 (4th Cir. June 3, 2013)
View document (PDF)Gold v. Old Republic Nat’l Title Ins. Co. (In re Taneja), 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 4203 (Bankr. E.D. Va. Nov. 23, 2010)
View document (PDF)Hyundai Emigration Corp. v. Empower-Visa, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142402 (E.D. Va. June 17, 2009)
In re Applicant for Security Clearance, ISCR Case No. 02-15474 (Dep’t of Defense App. Bd. July 3, 2006)
View document (PDF)In re Applicant for Security Clearance, ISCR Case No. 99-0016 (Dep’t of Defense App. Bd. May 21, 1999)
View document (PDF)In re Davis Distributors, Inc., 861 F.2d 416 (4th Cir. 1988)
View document (PDF)In re Green Valley Transp., Inc., B-285283, 2000 Comp. Gen. Proc. Dec. P133 (Comp. Gen. Aug. 9, 2000)
View document (PDF)In re Green Valley Transp., Inc. II, B-285283.2, 2001 Comp. Gen. Proc. Dec. P80 (Comp. Gen. April 16, 2001)
View document (PDF)In re Ready Transportation, Inc., B-285283.3; B-285283.4, 2001 Comp. Gen. Proc. Dec. P90 (Comp. Gen. May 8, 2001)
View document (PDF)Lee v. Mulford, 269 Va. 562 (Va. 2005)
View document (PDF)M&A Transaction – Acquirer: Computer Products Incorporated; Target: Columbia Research Corp.
M&A Transaction – Acquirer: Fairmont Company; Target: NorthTech Corporation
M&A Transaction – Acquirer: LEC Acquisition Corporation; Target: Hallmark Energy Economic dba Loud
M&A Transaction – Acquirer: Private Equity Group; Target: Freedom Bank of Virginia
M&A Transaction – Acquirer: Wilink U. S. Holdings, Inc.; Target: Communicast, Inc.
Millennium in re Inc. T/A Century 21 New Millennium, No. CL82028, 2009 Va. Cir. LEXIS 1571 (Prince William Cir. Ct. May 8, 2009)
View document (PDF)Munhuu v. Joiner, 111 Va. Cir. 227 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2023)
View document (PDF)O’Brien v. Flick, No. 24-61529-CIV-DAMIAN, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10625, at *1 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 10, 2025)
View document (PDF)Oral Argument at 19:30, Yelp, Inc. v. Hadeed Carpet Cleaning, Inc., No. 0116-13-4, available at http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/scv/oral_arguments/2014/oct/140242.mp3 (Va. October 17, 2014)
View document (PDF)Potomac Electric Co. v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, etc., 606 F.2d 1324 (D.C. Cir. 1979)
Argued the appeal before the D.C. Circuit and drafted the brief of appellant before that court and the brief of the respondant before the United States Supreme Court. The D.C. Circuit held that, in a federal workmen’s compensation case, an injured employee was entitled to the greater of the benefit for the loss of the use of a scheduled body part or the formula benefit for all other injuries. The United States Supreme Court reversed that decision.
Prudence Holman Waters, etc., et al. v. Meredith H. Lewis, etc., et al. (April 15, 2025)
View document (PDF)Qorvis Communs., LLC v. Wilson, 549 F.3d 303 (4th Cir. 2008)
View document (PDF)Ramirez v. Solomon Edwards Grp., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134964 (E.D. Va. July 17, 2008)
Scharpenberg v. Carrington, 686 F. Supp. 2d 655 (E.D. Va. 2010)
View document (PDF)Technology & Mgmt. Servs. v. EPA, No. 96-1386, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 2781 at *1 (4th Cir. Feb. 18, 1997)
View document (PDF)Trimark Ptnrs., L.L.C. v. HST, LL.C., 39 Va. Cir. 415 (Va.Cir.Ct., 1996)
View document (PDF)Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. Surface Transp. Bd., 202 F.3d 337 (D.C. Cir. 2000)
Principal drafter of the brief of intervener. The court adopted the arguments in the intervener’s brief and upheld the board’s determination that a railroad’s rates in conjunction with a bottleneck movement were unreasonable.
United States English Language Ctr. v. Accrediting Council for Higher Educ. & Training, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 226368 (E.D. Va. Sept. 11, 2019)
Wilson v. Moir (In re Wilson), 359 B.R. 123 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2006)
View document (PDF)Wincopia Farms, LP v. G&G, LLC (In re Wincopia Farms, LP), 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25522 (4th Cir. Dec. 2012)
View document (PDF)Blogs
Videos
News & Publications
Recent Highlights
Blog Post
Employment Law Landmines for Federal Contractors
Event
Nonprofit Forum
Video
The BKK Beat, Episode 27: Employment and IP Law in the News
News / Publication
2026 Super Lawyers
Blog Post
What is Worrying Our Nonprofit Clients – Part III: Staffing and Talent
Event
On Board
Video
The BKK Beat, Episode 26: Employment and IP Law in the News
News / Publication
