FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Contracts

Kaneff v. Delaware Title Loans, Inc.

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 3d Cir., Asset Forfeiture, Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Commercial Law, Consumer Products, Consumer Protection Law, Contracts, Debt Collection, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Government Law) In plaintiff's putative class action lawsuit against defendant-lender including a request for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction seeking the return of her car which defendant repossessed for refusing to pay the balance of a $500 loan at an annual interest rate of 300% to be paid within one month, grant of defendant's motion to compel arbitration and later dismissal of the case is affirmed as the arbitration clause in the parties' contract was valid and plaintiff's agreement to arbitrate would, with one possible and severable exception, not be considered unconscionable under Pennsylvania law.

Sherwood v. Marquette Transp. Co., LLC

Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Admiralty, Civil Procedure, Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Government Law, Injury And Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law) In plaintiff's suit against his employer under the Jones Act and general maritime law for injuries he suffered while working as a deckhand, defendant-employer's appeal of a district court's denial of its motion to stay the suit in favor of arbitration is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under 9 U.S.C. section 16(a)(1)(A) as: 1) section 16 is part of the Federal Arbitration Act, and as such, under the language of section 1, does not apply to any employment contract involving a seaman; and 2) section also is inapplicable, and defendant's motion for a stay did not rely on it.

Borden v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 5th Cir., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Insurance Law) In an action seeking insurance proceeds related to Hurricane Katrina, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed in part where plaintiff's claims against defendant-insurance agent were barred by Louisiana's one year statute of limitations for actions against insurance agents. However, the order is vacated in part where the district court overlooked plaintiff's affidavit averring the timeliness of his notice of the claim to defendant.

Snyder v. Bronfman

Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:00:02 PDT

(N.Y., Contracts, Injury And Tort Law) In an action to recover the value of plaintiff's services in helping to achieve a corporate acquisition, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where plaintiff's quantum meruit and unjust enrichment claims were barred by the statute of frauds contained in General Obligations Law section 5-701 (a)(10).

Hukic v. Aurora Loan Serv.

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Civil Procedure, Commercial Law, Contracts, Injury And Tort Law) In plaintiff's suit against defendants claiming breach of contract, tortious interference, and violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, arising from a six-figure mortgage he obtained at an interest rate of 10.65% where he was to make monthly payments as well as taxes, insurance premiums and other charges and fees, summary judgment in defendants' favor and dismissal of plaintiff's claims for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress is affirmed because plaintiff did not comply with the terms of his agreement that required him to submit proof of payment.

Curia v. Nelson

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Contracts, Corporation & Enterprise Law, Evidence, Securities Law) In parties' dispute over the terms of a stock purchase agreement entered into in 1989 and several modification of the agreement over the next decade involving a small number of shares in two automobile dealerships and whether the contract also gave plaintiff option to purchase remaining shares, summary judgment in plaintiff's favor is reversed as extrinsic evidence is required to clarify what the parties meant because the contract as modified is reasonably susceptible to both parties' interpretation and is therefore ambiguous regarding the survival of the options.

PPG Indus., Incorp. v. Int'l Chem. Workers Union Council of the United Food and Commercial Workers

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 4th Cir., Administrative Law, Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Labor & Employment Law) District court's order vacating an arbitrator's award in favor of a union on the ground that the arbitrator exceeded his authority by adding a term to the underlying contract is reversed and remanded as, even if the arbitrator erred, he acted within the scope of his authority under the contract.

Dealer Computer Servs. Inc. v. Old Colony Motors Inc.

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 5th Cir., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration) In an action under 9 U.S.C. section 4 to compel defendant to pay a deposit in the underlying arbitration between the parties, an order requiring defendant to pay is reversed where the issue of whether defendant should be required to pay was a procedural issue left to the discretion of the arbitrators.

Martco Ltd. Pshp. v. Wellons Inc.

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 5th Cir., Contracts, Insurance Law) In an action against an insurer seeking coverage for an underlying lawsuit regarding defects in a heating system installed by plaintiff, summary judgment for defendant is reversed where: 1) defendant had a duty to defend the underlying suit in light of the language of the policy and the allegations of the underlying complaint; and 2) the "work product" exclusion in the policy did not preclude recovery.

Hoffman v. Smithwoods RV Park, LLC

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Injury And Tort Law, Property Law & Real Estate) In plaintiff's suit against the defendant-Mobile Park for refusing to permit the installation of a new mobile home in its mobile home park to replace an older one that plaintiff had inherited, trial court's dismissal of plaintiff's suit is affirmed where: 1) the complaint fails to state a cause of action for statutory violation; 2) the complaint fails to state a tort cause of action for interference with contract; 3) the complaint fails to state a contract cause of action; and 4) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend.

Davis v. Ford Motor Credit Co.

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Attorney's Fees, Civil Procedure, Commercial Law, Consumer Products, Consumer Protection Law, Contracts, Government Law) In plaintiff's action against the Ford Motor Credit Company (Ford) claiming that Ford's billing practices under a retail installment sales contract in charging late fees is prohibited by the Rees-Levering Motor Vehicle Sales and Finance Act, and actionable under Unfair Competition Law and the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, dismissal of the suit is affirmed where: 1) Ford's conduct of charging successive late fees for successive late payments does not violate Civil Code section 2982(k)'s prohibition on charging more than one late fee per delinquent installment; 2) plaintiff cannot allege Ford's billing practice is an unfair business practice within the meaning of UCL because the alleged injury is one plaintiff reasonably could have avoided; and 3) although Ford was the prevailing party, it cannot recover its attorney's fees pursuant to the Rees-Levering's reciprocal attorney's fees provision because the alleged Rees-Levering violation was merely a predicate to the UCL claims, and a prevailing defendant cannot recover attorney's fees under the UCL.

Dowell v. Pacesetter, Inc.

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law) In plaintiffs' suit against the defendant to enjoin it from enforcing noncompete and nonsolicitation clauses in employment agreements used in California, trial court's ruling that the clauses were facially void under Business and Professions Code section 16600 and that their use violated California's Unfair Competition Law and that defendant's unclean hands defense and its cross-complaint for unfair competition failed as a matter of law is affirmed where: 1) the trial court properly determined that the clauses were void as a matter of law, that no defense applied and that the cross-complaint failed to state a cause of action; and 2) trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a permanent injunction and costs

Alabama Aircraft Indus., Inc. v. US

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. Fed. Cir., Administrative Law, Aerospace & Defense, Contracts, Government Contracts, Government Law, Military Law) In plaintiff's post-award bid protest case against the Department of the Air Force (agency) for awarding a billion-dollar-plus contract to Boeing for long-term maintenance on the Air Force's fleet of KC-135 Stratotanker aircraft, judgment in favor of plaintiff is reversed and the injunction against proceeding with the contract awarded to Boeing is vacated as the agency's price-realism analysis based on the set work package was not arbitrary and capricious, and the trial court's contrary determination was not within the court's scope of review under the APA standard.

Epic Communications, Inc. v. Richwave Tech., Inc.

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Corporation & Enterprise Law, Intellectual Property, International Law, International Trade, Manufacturing) In an action by a Taiwanese corporation and its California subsidiary seeking damages for misappropriation of intellectual property involving a Design Services Agreement of a silicon-germanium power amplifier for use in wireless networking devices, trial court's order quashing service of summons is reversed where: 1) a refusal by California courts to exercise jurisdiction cannot be justified by the mere fact that a claim arising from California contacts is prosecuted by a nonresident; and 2) subjecting the defendant to local jurisdiction comports with fair play and substantial justice as, here the two Taiwanese defendants engaged in conduct in California, and caused effects in California, that made it readily foreseeable that they would be haled into court here in the event of a dispute of the present type.

Kovach v. Zurich American Ins. Co.

Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 6th Cir., Administrative Law, Contracts, ERISA, Health Law, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law) In plaintiff's ERISA suit against an insurance company for denying his claim for dismemberment benefits arising from a drunk-driving motorcycle accident, summary judgment for defendant-plan administrator is reversed and remanded for entry of judgment in favor of the plaintiffs where: 1) defendant's decision to deny benefits to the plaintiffs was contrary to the everyday meaning of the word "accidental" as it would be understood by a typical policyholder, and was based almost entirely on a body of largely distinguishable district court cases; 2) plaintiff's injuries were not "highly likely to occur" as a result of his intoxication, in contrast to the injuries that were highly likely to occur under the facts in Lennon; 3) defendant's interpretation of the Plan's provisions amounts to an additional, unwritten exclusion for all drunk-driving injuries, which is not permitted under even the most deferential standard of review; and 4) defendant's denial of coverage based on plaintiff's injuries being non-accidental was unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious.