CONTRACTS CASES

• Phillips v. Audio Active Ltd.
• Goodman v. Praxair, Inc.
• Haspel & Davis Milling & Planting Co. v. Bd. of Levee Comm'rs
• Warren v. Detroit
• Matthews v. Milwaukee Area Local Postal Workers Union
• Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc. v. DiMartinis
• Blue Cross Blue Shield of IL v. Cruz
• Emergency Med. Servs., Inc. v. St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co.
• Sokol & Assocs., Inc. v. Techsonic Indus., Inc.
• Monroe v. AR State Univ.
• Hamilton Materials Inc. v. Union Carbide Corp.
• Golden Pisces, Inc. v. Fred Wahl Marine Constr., Inc.
• ClearOne Comms, Inc. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA
• Bank of America, FSB v. US
• Advantec Group, Inc. v. Edwin's Plumbing Co.
• Archdale v. Am. Int'l Specialty Lines Ins. Co.
• Morgan Creek Residential v. Kemp
• Performance Plastering v. Richmond Am. Homes of Cal., Inc.
• Wang v. Wal-Mart Real Estate Bus. Trust
• Sherwood Partners, Inc. v. EOP-Marina Bus. Ctr., L.L.C.

U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, July 24, 2007
Phillips v. Audio Active Ltd., No. 05-7017
Dismissal of Pete Rock's copyright infringement complaint for improper venue is affirmed as to the forum selection clause requiring proceedings be brought in England, however, the dismissal is reversed as to plaintiff's remaining claims predicated on defendants' alleged infringement of his copyrights. Read more...

U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 25, 2007
Goodman v. Praxair, Inc., No. 06-1009
Dismissal of amended complaint for breach of contract is reversed where the district court erred in applying Maryland's three-year statute of limitations and in refusing to apply the relation back afforded by Rule 15(c), Fed. R. Civ. P., when plaintiff named the corporate subsidiary as a defendant. Read more...

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 23, 2007
Haspel & Davis Milling & Planting Co. v. Bd. of Levee Comm'rs, No. 07-30086
In a takings claim against the Orleans Levee District over the mineral rights for property expropriated as part of the Bohemia Spillway, summary judgment for plaintiffs is reversed and judgment entered for defendant where the plaintiffs, by entering into an earlier settlement agreement with the District, compromised their takings claim against the Levee Board, and thus, extinguished any takings claim they may have had. Read more...

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 23, 2007
Warren v. Detroit, No. 06-1380
In a suit alleging breach of contract and violations of Michigan law relating to rates charged for the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department's provision of water to residents of plaintiff-municipality, denial of plaintiff's motion to remand is reversed where a substantial, disputed question of federal law was not a necessary element of either of plaintiff's state-law claims. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 23, 2007
Matthews v. Milwaukee Area Local Postal Workers Union, No. 06-3211
In a suit alleging that a union had failed to fairly represent a member in connection with a grievance the union filed on his behalf, summary judgment for the union is affirmed where the union did not process the grievance in an arbitrary or perfunctory manner. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 26, 2007
Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc. v. DiMartinis, No. 06-4012
In a suit involving an employee's move to a competitor, appeal from a denial of a preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot where the end date for the requested injunction had already passed, thus the court could not grant any meaningful relief. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 27, 2007
Blue Cross Blue Shield of IL v. Cruz, No. 03-4170
In a suit by an insurer to recover funds from an insured after the insured received money in a settlement with the injurer, dismissal of the suit is affirmed upon remand from the Supreme Court where there was no federal question jurisdiction according to the Court's recent decision in Empire HealthChoice Assurance, Inc. v. McVeigh, 126 S. Ct. 2121 (2006). Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 26, 2007
Emergency Med. Servs., Inc. v. St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co., No. 05-3859
In a suit to recover the costs of defending a personal injury and medical malpractice suit from an insurance carrier, summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) an emotional distress claim fell under the policy language because it referenced physical injuries alleged elsewhere in the complaint; 2) the source of the injuries qualified as an "event" under the policy language; 3) the claims did not fit under any exclusion language in the policy; 4) the insurance company was not prejudiced by a delay in notice; 5) attorney's fees were appropriate; and 6) the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying prejudgment interest. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 26, 2007
Sokol & Assocs., Inc. v. Techsonic Indus., Inc., No. 06-2379
In a suit involving the breach of a sales representative agreement, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where plaintiff did not present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the parties' agreement was modified so that its ten-year term applied to the sale of disputed products. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 26, 2007
Monroe v. AR State Univ., No. 06-3519
In a suit involving plaintiff's dismissal from a nursing program, denial of summary judgment is reversed where: 1) the Eleventh Amendment bars suit against the University for any kind of relief, not merely monetary damages; and 2) University employees were entitled to qualified immunity. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 23, 2007
Hamilton Materials Inc. v. Union Carbide Corp., No. 05-55976
In a suit alleging fraud in relation to the manufacture of asbestos-based products, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) a sophisticated manufacturer of asbestos would have been aware of a potential misrepresentation beyond the statute of limitations; 2) appellant was clearly on notice that the court would look beyond the pleadings and would potentially convert a motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment; and 3) there was only one reasonable interpretation of inquiry notice to plaintiffs regarding the fraud. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 24, 2007
Golden Pisces, Inc. v. Fred Wahl Marine Constr., Inc., No. 05-35477
In a breach of contract suit regarding repairs to a ship, denial of plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees is affirmed where, under the American Rule, which applies in maritime litigation, plaintiffs are not entitled to attorneys' fees absent statutory authorization, an enforceable contractual provision, or an equitable exception to the rule. Since none of those elements were present, the district court properly denied plaintiffs' motion. Read more...

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, July 25, 2007
ClearOne Comms, Inc. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, No. 05-4294
In a suit involving the rescission of an insurance contract after the discovery of financial misrepresentations on the application, summary judgment for defendant-insurer is remanded where the district court made no determination regarding scienter for the misrepresentations. Read more...

U.S. Fed. Circuit Court of Appeals, July 26, 2007
Bank of America, FSB v. US, No. 06-5088
In a suit involving a series of banking transactions and regulations, district court judgment is affirmed where there was no reversible error in the court's determination that: 1) a plaintiff filed its complaint within the statute of limitations; 2) two plaintiffs were not parties to a contract with the government; 3) the plaintiffs deserved no damages for replacing regulatory capital with retained earnings; 4) a plaintiff deserved an actual cost measure to replace lost capital; 5) a liquidating dividend was a cost of substituting tangible capital for the capital lost as a result of the breach of the government's contract with a plaintiff's predecessor in interest; 6) the predecessor in interest's average cost of funds supplied a measure of the damages for the capital phased-out as a result of the breach; 7) a plaintiff deserved no damages on its claim for a deposit forfeited in association with a failed acquisition; and 8) a plaintiff deserved no tax gross up of the damages a! warded. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 23, 2007
Advantec Group, Inc. v. Edwin's Plumbing Co., No. B191812
In suit by contractor to recover compensation for work requiring a contractor's license, grant of nonsuit on defendant contractor's cross-complaint against plaintiff developer is affirmed as a defendant's answer containing a general denial of the material allegations of the contractor's claim is sufficient to controvert the contractor's allegation of licensure, and thus invokes the requirement of Business and Professions Code section 7031(d) that the contractor prove licensure by producing a verified certificate. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 24, 2007
Archdale v. Am. Int'l Specialty Lines Ins. Co., No. B188432
In bad faith action arising out of underlying suit for personal injuries from multiple vehicle accident, summary judgment for defendants is reversed as to plaintiffs' bad faith contract claim as: 1) where a liability insurer has provided a defense and, prior to the filing of an action by an insured, has fully paid out the amount of its policy limit, it may not be liable for the breach of any express policy provision, but could be held liable for a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; 2) an insurer's failure to accept a reasonable settlement offer to resolve a third party claim against its insured constitutes a breach of the covenant of good faith and dealing implied in a liability policy; 3) such a breach will support a claim sounding in contract as well as tort; 4) the amount of the excess judgment is a consequential damage of such a breach within the meaning of Civil Code section 3300 and may be recovered as a matter of contract damages; 5) while an! insured's claim against an insurer arising from a failure to accept a reasonable settlement offer will accrue upon the entry of an excess judgment in the underlying action, the running of the limitations period is tolled until the time for appeal has expired or, until entry of a final judgment and the issuance of a remittitur; and 6) Civil Code section 2313 will not invalidate an insured's retroactive assignment of a claim against his or her insurer if the assignment is made prior to the expiration of the relevant limitation period on that claim. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 24, 2007
Morgan Creek Residential v. Kemp, No. C053098
In case involving claims of equitable contribution and subrogation, sustaining of demurrer is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff is not entitled to contribution from the guarantors because the liabilities of an applicant of a letter of credit and the guarantors are not equal; and 2) plaintiff is not entitled to subrogation under the California Uniform Commercial Code. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 24, 2007
Performance Plastering v. Richmond Am. Homes of Cal., Inc., No. C052768
In case involving contract dispute between home builder, a subcontractor, and the subcontractor's insurer, regarding alleged violation of El Nino and Air Design settlement agreements, sustaining of demurrer based on plaintiff subcontractor being a suspended corporation and insurer lacking standing is reversed where the insurer was a party to the Air Design settlement agreement and was a third party beneficiary of the El Nino settlement agreements. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 25, 2007
Wang v. Wal-Mart Real Estate Bus. Trust, No. D050464
In action for breach of contract, fraud, conspiracy to defraud and other theories, arising from dispute over sale of two parcels of plaintiffs' real property to defendant, orders granting special motions to strike the complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute are reversed where the trial court erroneously found that the references in the various causes of action to the applications for city development permits converted these causes of action into liability claims that were based principally upon protected speech or conduct. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, July 27, 2007
Sherwood Partners, Inc. v. EOP-Marina Bus. Ctr., L.L.C., No. B189590
In case where an assignee for the benefit of the creditors of an insolvent entity filed suit against tenant's landlord for return of tenant's security deposit, judgment for defendant and grant of costs and attorney fees is reversed as plaintiff assignee cannot be personally liable for the award of attorney fees pursuant to the written lease between defendant and tenant. Read more...