CONTRACTS CASES

• Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund v. Zeneca Inc.
• Kennedy v. Plan Admin. for Dupont Savings & Inv. Plan
• United National Ins. Co. v. Hydro Tank, Inc.
• GWTP Invs., L.P. v. SES Americom, Inc.
• Lindsay v. Yates
• Davis v. US
• Lackawanna Chapter of the Ry. & Locomotive Historical Soc'y v. St. Louis County
• Emmert Indus. Corp. v. Artisan Assocs., Inc.
• AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Roden
• In re: Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litig.
• Dist. Council No. 16 of the Int'l Union of Painters & Allied Trades v. B & B Glass, Inc.
• Shroyer v. New Cingular Wireless Servs., Inc.
• AT&T Mobility LLC v. NASCAR
• Grumman Aerospace Corp. v. Wynne
• Winter v. Cath-dr/Balti Joint Venture
• Totten v. Hill

U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, August 17, 2007
Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund v. Zeneca Inc., No. 05-5340
In an action against a drug maker alleging it engaged in deceptive conduct in the advertising of its new drug Nexium, dismissal of the complaint with prejudice is affirmed where: 1) although the Delaware Consumer Fraud Act (DCFA) exemption for advertising regulated by the Federal Trade Commission does not preclude plaintiffs' suit; nevertheless 2) federal law preempts the plaintiffs' state consumer fraud claims. Read more...

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 15, 2007
Kennedy v. Plan Admin. for Dupont Savings & Inv. Plan, No. 05-41851
In an ERISA dispute, summary judgment awarding an estate benefits under a retirement plan is affirmed in part as to a denial of attorney's fees for the estate, but vacated in part as to the judgment as: 1) contrary to the findings below, ERISA's anti-alienation provision controls and the federal common-law waiver approach was inapplicable; and 2) thus, a divorce decree did not constitute a waiver of former wife's rights as a savings and investment plan beneficiary. Read more...

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 15, 2007
United National Ins. Co. v. Hydro Tank, Inc., No. 06-20335
In a dispute over insurance coverage for a settlement of an underlying suit brought by workers injured during sludge removal conducted pursuant to a contract, summary judgment for insurer is affirmed where there was no error in the district court's conclusion that coverage was barred by an insurance policy's Pollution Exclusion clause and not resurrected by a Contractors Limitation Endorsement clause. Read more...

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 16, 2007
GWTP Invs., L.P. v. SES Americom, Inc., No. 06-10747
In a suit for breach of contract, fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty arising from defendant's alleged agreement to purchase teleports on plaintiff's behalf at a bankruptcy auction and subsequent refusal to transfer them, dismissal of the contract and fraud claims and summary judgment on the fiduciary duty claim is reversed in part as to the fraud claim as the Statute of Frauds does not bar plaintiff's fraud claim insofar as it sought only reliance damages. Read more...

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 15, 2007
Lindsay v. Yates, No. 06-4430
In a suit brought under federal and state anti-discrimination laws against defendants asserting that they terminated a real-estate sales contract with plaintiffs one day after learning that they are black, dismissal of the suit is reversed and remanded where: 1) the district court erred by requiring plaintiffs to plead facts establishing a prima facie case under the McDonnell Douglas/Burdine framework; and 2) plaintiffs are not required to plead facts showing that a purchase agreement was valid and enforceable in order to state a claim for relief. Read more...

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 16, 2007
Davis v. US, No. 06-4514
In an action seeking a declaratory judgment to determine the amount of financial support that plaintiff owes to his wife, from whom he is legally separated, under an Affidavit of Support that the government required him to file on her behalf when she immigrated to the U.S., dismissal of the complaint is affirmed as: 1) the district court did not err in dismissing the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; 2) the complaint was barred under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine; and 3) and there was no error in an alternative finding that plaintiff lacked standing for his claim. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 14, 2007
Lackawanna Chapter of the Ry. & Locomotive Historical Soc'y v. St. Louis County, No. 06-3662
In a dispute over the possession of a historic steam locomotive currently displayed by defendant-county at a museum, a decision rejecting plaintiff's claims for replevin and specific performance is remanded for further proceedings where, because the district court did not address the express or implied bailment of the locomotive for an indefinite period, the absence of any other written contract governing the loan and defendant's possession cannot alone resolve plaintiff's action in replevin. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 13, 2007
Emmert Indus. Corp. v. Artisan Assocs., Inc., No. 05-35622
In a case involving contract claims arising from the parties' agreement for the transportation of industrial metal-stamping presses and press components, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) there was no merit to a contention that the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act's (ICCTA) time limitation period applies only when a carrier seeks to recover charges owed under a filed tariff; 2) such limitations period barred two claims on the facts of the case; but 3) material questions of fact regarding the nature and scope of the parties' agreement remained in dispute, for purposes of another claim asserting an independent breach of contract. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 13, 2007
AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Roden, No. 05-55349
In a contract suit brought by a successor company against the former CEO of the predecessor, dismissal the federal suit under the Younger abstention doctrine is reversed and remanded in part as the dismissal of one count attempting to secure a binding and enforceable court judgment requiring the CEO to repay an earlier loan could not be justified under Younger, the Anti-Injunction Act, or the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 14, 2007
In re: Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litig., No. 05-35648
In an action brought by residents claiming that emissions from a plutonium-production facility operated by defendants caused various cancers and other life-threatening diseases, rulings stemming from a bellwether trial are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) complete immunity under the common law government contractor defense was inapplicable as a matter of law to defendants; 2) none of defendants' contentions were sufficient to relieve them of strict liability for the injuries they caused; 3) under Washington law, the district court properly instructed the jury that to impose liability, it had to find that the facility was the "but for" cause of plaintiffs' diseases and not just a contributing cause under the more lenient "substantial factor" test; 4) the district court properly dismissed any medical monitoring claims as not cognizable under the federal law at issue; 5) a judgment against one plaintiff, as well as a judgment in favor of another were proper; 6) jud! gments against certain plaintiffs required reversal on evidentiary grounds; and 7) a judgment for a plaintiff is reversed on statute of limitations grounds. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 16, 2007
Dist. Council No. 16 of the Int'l Union of Painters & Allied Trades v. B & B Glass, Inc., No. 05-16258
In construction industry labor litigation brought by a union against a Texas company, grant of the company's motion to dismiss the union's petition to compel arbitration is affirmed as: 1) plaintiff-union has no agreement with the employer that it sought to take to arbitration; and 2) it could not show that the employer against whom it filed its claim controls a company doing the work in California. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 17, 2007
Shroyer v. New Cingular Wireless Servs., Inc., No. 06-55964
In a class action suit alleging plaintiffs suffered injuries as a result of the 2004 merger between Cingular Wireless and AT&T, an order compelling arbitration of the action is reversed where: 1) a class arbitration waiver in New Cingular Wireless Service's standard contract for cellular phone services is unconscionable under California law, and thus, unenforceable; and 2) the Federal Arbitration Act does not preempt a holding that the waiver is unenforceable. Read more...

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 13, 2007
AT&T Mobility LLC v. NASCAR, No. 07-12299
Preliminary injunction enjoining defendant NASCAR from interfering with the display of plaintiff's logo on a car in NASCAR Cup Series races is vacated where plaintiff lacks standing to challenge defendant's decision. Read more...

U.S. Fed. Circuit Court of Appeals, August 17, 2007
Grumman Aerospace Corp. v. Wynne, No. 2006-1482
In a matter arising from Grumman's contract with the Air Force to modernize the avionics of certain F-111 aircraft, denial of Grumman's superior knowledge claim against the Air Force, as well as a denial of any damages under the jury verdict method on fourteen of its sustained claims, is affirmed where: 1) the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals correctly denied the superior knowledge claim; and 2) there was no abuse of discretion in denying the jury verdict method claim. Read more...

U.S. Fed. Circuit Court of Appeals, August 17, 2007
Winter v. Cath-dr/Balti Joint Venture, No. 2006-1359
In a dispute involving a fixed price contract with the Navy for external renovation of a historic dental research facility, a decision finding in favor of contractor on certain claims for an equitable adjustment in contract price is partially affirmed, reversed, vacated and remanded as: 1) because the contract explicitly reserved authority to modify the contract to the Contracting Officer, a Resident Officer in Charge of Contracts (ROICC) did not have actual express or implied authority to direct the contractor to perform compensable contract changes; but 2) one claim was independently sustainable based on a differing site condition; and 3) other claims are remanded for to determine whether the ROICC's directives on those claims were ratified. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, August 13, 2007
Totten v. Hill, No. A114467
In breach of contract dispute over a benefit plan participant's recovery of a medical malpractice settlement, summary judgment for defendant is vacated and the complaint is dismissed where: 1) plaintiff trustees had a federal ERISA claim for reimbursement over which the federal courts exercise exclusive subject matter jurisdiction; and 2) state courts not only lack concurrent jurisdiction over ERISA claims for reimbursement, but their jurisdiction over state law claims is displaced by ERISA. Read more...