CONTRACTS CASES

• Coffin v. Bowater, Inc.
• Karaha Bodas Co., LLC v. Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi Negara
• Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc.
• CSX Transp. Co. v. Novolog Bucks County
• Del Monte Fresh Produce N.A., Inc. v. Transp. Ins. Co.
• Hammonds v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co
• New Regency Prods., Inc. v. Nippon Herald Films, Inc.
• Zila, Inc. v. Tinnell
• Comedy Club, Inc. v. Improv W. Assocs.
• Solidus Networks, Inc. v. Excel Innovations, Inc.
• Dale v. Comcast Corp.
• Baron v. Fire Ins. Exch.
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Mercury Ins. Co.
• Knabe v. Brister

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, September 07, 2007
Coffin v. Bowater, Inc., No. 06-1964
In a suit over the effective termination date of a company's obligations under ERISA to the employees of its subsidiary after the sale of the subsidiary, partial summary judgment for plaintiffs-employees is affirmed where defendant did not terminate its responsibility for ERISA plans according to the procedural requirements of the statute, and partial summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where a plan consolidation subsequent to the sale effectively ended defendant's financial responsibility for plaintiffs' health benefits. Summary judgment for defendant on claims under the Labor Management Relations Act that defendant's denial of benefits breached collective bargaining agreements is affirmed where the language of the CBAs was clear, and plaintiffs failed to establish a latent ambiguity that required consideration of extrinsic evidence. Read more...

U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, September 07, 2007
Karaha Bodas Co., LLC v. Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi Negara, No. 07-0065
In a dispute over a foreign arbitration award arising out of an abandoned energy project, an injunction preventing respondent from pursuing foreign litigation that the district court determined would undermine federal judgments confirming and enforcing the foreign arbitration award against respondent is affirmed despite the district court's legal error where: 1) the test set forth in China Trade & Development Corp. v. M.V. Choong Yong, 837 F.2d 33 (2d Cir. 1987), rather than the "more lenient" test used by the District court, applies to the anti-suit injunction; 2) the injunction was appropriate under the China Trade test; and 3) the district court maintained jurisdiction to protect its judgments even after the money judgment against appellant was satisfied. The injunction is modified to clarify that the injunction does not prohibit foreign confirmation proceedings contemplated by the New York Convention. Read more...

U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, September 04, 2007
Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 06-4292
In a consensus-oriented private standard-setting environment, a patent holder's intentionally false promise to license essential proprietary technology on "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory" terms, coupled with a standards-determining organization's reliance on that promise when including the technology in a standard, and the patent holder's subsequent breach of that promise, is actionable anticompetitive conduct. In an antitrust action brought against Qualcomm, dismissal of the complaint is reversed in part where the District Court erred in dismissing a monopolization claim on the ground that abuse of a private standard-setting process does not state a claim under antitrust law, and plaintiff's claim successfully pleaded such a cause of action. Read more...

U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, September 05, 2007
CSX Transp. Co. v. Novolog Bucks County, No. 06-3431
In a dispute arising when plaintiff-railroad sought to assess demurrage charges against defendant-transloader for delays in returning railcars to service, judgment as a matter of law in favor of defendant is vacated and remanded as: 1) the consignee-agent provision of the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act governs the dispute as to the charges assessed against defendant as the consignee of freight; 2) however, further proceedings and development of the record was necessary to assess whether defendant was liable under the Act; 3) the judgment as to defendant's potential liability for demurrage charges in its role as the shipper of freight is vacated and remanded, as well; and 4) the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to refer an issue to the Surface Transportation Board. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 05, 2007
Del Monte Fresh Produce N.A., Inc. v. Transp. Ins. Co., No. 06-3365
In a suit regarding an insurer's duty to defend against class action antitrust claims, summary judgment for defendant-insurer is affirmed where the duty to defend depends on the terms of the complaint, and the complaint in question alleged activities that came under an exclusion in the policy. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 07, 2007
Hammonds v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co, No. 06-3549
In an action brought against an insurer claiming it acted in bad faith by delaying payments due to plaintiff under a settlement agreement and filing a petition to terminate current benefits, summary judgment for insurer is affirmed as: 1) plaintiff could show no "loss" with regard to insurer's requests for documentation and its delay in payments; and 2) insurer had a reasonable basis to file a petition to terminate benefits based on a change of circumstances. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 04, 2007
New Regency Prods., Inc. v. Nippon Herald Films, Inc., No. 05-55224
In an appeal arising from the arbitration of a contract dispute between a film production company and a film distribution company, a decision vacating an arbitration award is affirmed where vacatur by the district court for evident partiality" of the arbitrator was proper under the Federal Arbitration Act. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 05, 2007
Zila, Inc. v. Tinnell, No. 05-15031, 05-15087
In a dispute arising from defendant's agreement with a company in which he assigned all rights in his invention to the company in return for royalty payments and company stock, summary judgment for the company is reversed and remanded to the district court for a determination of whether defendant should be credited with invention of a 1992 patent, which would entitle him to domestic royalties until such patent expires. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 07, 2007
Comedy Club, Inc. v. Improv W. Assocs., No. 05-55739, 05-56100
In a dispute between the owner of the "Improv" and "Improvisation" trademarks, and the Comedy Club company, an order confirming an arbitration award against the Comedy Club is affirmed in part and vacated in part as: 1) the arbitrator properly arbitrated equitable claims; 2) the arbitrator's award was not completely irrational; 3) the arbitrator exceeded the scope of his authority by enjoining non-party Affiliates; and 4) the arbitrator's award violates California Business and Professions Code section 16600. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 07, 2007
Solidus Networks, Inc. v. Excel Innovations, Inc., No. 06-17288
When a bankruptcy debtor applies for a 11 U.S.C. section 105(a) preliminary injunction to stay a proceeding in which the debtor is not a party, the bankruptcy court must balance the debtor's likelihood of success in reorganization against the relative hardship of the parties, as well as consider the public interest if warranted. Read more...

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 04, 2007
Dale v. Comcast Corp., No. 06-15516
In class action alleging violations of state law based on the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, order dismissing action and compelling arbitration is reversed as the arbitration agreements are unenforceable. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, September 04, 2007
Baron v. Fire Ins. Exch., No. H029830
Jury verdict against defendant-insurer finding that it intentionally concealed and misrepresented an important fact and unreasonably failed to investigate and pay a claim covered under a fire insurance policy is affirmed over claim that appointment of respondent as receiver for the insured property was void or at least invalid for purposes of recovering punitive damages. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, September 05, 2007
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Mercury Ins. Co., No. B189977
In case where insured has insurance coverage under more than one uninsured motorist policy, summary judgment for defendant insurer is affirmed as, under Insurance Code section 11580.2, the policy with the proration provision takes preference over the policy with the excess coverage provision. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, September 06, 2007
Knabe v. Brister, No. C053225
In a case involving the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA), a stipulation signed by the parties' attorneys agreeing to transfer exclusive jurisdiction over a child support order from Texas to California is valid and enforceable even though it was not signed by the litigating parties themselves. Read more...