FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Contracts

Lincoln Nat'l Life Ins., Co. v. Bezich

Fri, 25 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Contracts, Insurance Law, Securities Law) A petition for permission to appeal, arising from the district court's remand of plaintiff's class action lawsuit against an insurer for breach of contract claims on the basis that CAFA's exception to federal jurisdiction for the action applied, is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as plaintiff's claim "related to the rights, duties,...and obligations relating to or created by or pursuant to...a security," as defined in the Securities Act of 1933.

Rathborne Land Co. v. Ascent Engy., Inc.

Fri, 25 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 5th Cir., Civil Procedure, Commercial Law, Contracts, Oil & Gas Law, Property Law & Real Estate, Remedies) In an action for breach of defendant's obligations to reasonably develop and explore a leased parcel of oil, gas, and mineral land, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed in part where: 1) plaintiff's letter to defendant met the La. Rev. Stat. Ann. section 31:136 demand requirement; and 2) district court did not clearly err in concluding that plaintiff would have been able to lease the disputed acreage more than once if it had been able to seismically survey the parcel prior to 2006. However, the judgment is vacated in part where neither the district court nor plaintiff could show an adequate ground -- indeed, any relevant precedent -- for awarding consequential damages for lost leasing and seismic revenues on the entire parcel.

Bagby Elevator Co. v. Schindler Elevator Corp.

Fri, 25 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 5th Cir., Commercial Law, Contracts, Evidence, Injury And Tort Law) In an action for tortious interference with contract, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) under the court's highly deferential standard of review, there was no reversible error in the district court's decision to use the pattern jury instruction; 2) there was sufficient evidence of both malice and gross negligence to support an award of exemplary damages; and 3) there was ample evidence of causation to support the verdict.

Greenspan v. LADT, LLC

Fri, 25 Jun 2010 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Probate, Trusts & Estates, Property Law & Real Estate) In a trust's suit for breach of contract and other claims against two affiliated companies and individuals, trial court's confirmation of an arbitrator's award against defendants in the amount of $6.34 million is affirmed where: 1) per the JAMS rules, the arbitrator, not a court, determines what issues are arbitrable, and here, the arbitrator determined that the issue of joint and several liability was arbitrable; 2) arbitrator's finding of joint and several liability was rationally related to the parties' contract; 3) as to the timeliness of the final award under JAMS rules, the arbitrator's interpretation and application of the rules cannot be judicially reviewed on the merits; and 4) the suit against the arbitrator was barred by arbitral immunity and would not have caused a reasonable person to doubt the arbitrator's impartiality.

Granite Rock Co. v. Int'l. Brotherhood of Teamsters

Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S.S.C., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Labor & Employment Law) In an action against a labor union by an employer, invoking federal jurisdiction under section 301(a) of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), seeking strike-related damages for the unions' alleged breach of contract, and asking for an injunction against the ongoing strike because the hold-harmless dispute was an arbitrable grievance under the new collective bargaining agreement (CBA), the Ninth Circuit's partial affirmance of the district court's order dismissing plaintiff's tortious interference claims and denying defendant's separate motion to send the parties' dispute over the CBA's ratification date to arbitration is affirmed in part where the Ninth Circuit did not err in declining to recognize a new federal common-law cause of action under LMRA section 301(a) for defendant's alleged tortious interference with the CBA. However, the judgment is reversed in part where the parties' dispute over the CBA's ratification date was a matter for the district court, not an arbitrator, to resolve.

Baker v. Am. Horticulture Supply, Inc.

Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(Cal. App., Contracts, Labor & Employment Law, Remedies, Wholesale) In an independent wholesale sales representative's suit for breach of contract, promissory fraud, and a violation under the Independent Wholesale Sales Representatives Contractual Relations Act of 1990, judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial on the breach of contract and promissory fraud claims in concluding that the award of damages was excessive and that plaintiff was not entitled to a 10% commission in alleged sales; and 2) trial court's grant of defendant's motion for a directed verdict on the violation of the Act claim is reversed as the evidence is sufficient to support a finding that defendant willfully failed to enter into a written contract as required by the Act.

Rectrix Aerodrome Ctr., Inc. v. Barnstable Mun. Airport Comm'n

Wed, 23 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Antitrust & Trade Regulation, Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Contracts, Landlord Tenant Law) In plaintiff's suit against an airport commission and individual defendants, claiming that it was prevented from competing with defendant in the sale of jet fuel, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's fraud claim fails as plaintiff was a commercial tenant of the airport and, given the self-service standards and lease terms, had no right and no reasonable expectation of being able to sell jet fuel at the airport; 2) the antitrust claim is barred by the state action doctrine given the Massachusetts statute; and 3) plaintiff's equal protection claim under section 1983 fails as no private entity at the airport has the privilege sought by plaintiff.

Air Line Pilots Ass'n v. US Airways Group

Wed, 23 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 4th Cir., Aerospace & Defense, Contracts, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law, Transportation, Travel & Leisure) In an airline pilots union's suit to establish and arbitrate before a multi-employer, multi-union board of adjustment, district court's dismissal of the complaint is affirmed as plaintiff's claim is foreclosed by the plain language of section 204 of the Railway Labor Act, which permits but does not require such a board adjustment, and plaintiff's alternative state law claim is meritless.

Insurance Co. of N. Am. v. Pub. Serv. Mut. Ins. Co.

Wed, 23 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 2d Cir., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Insurance Law) In an appeal from the district court's order granting respondent's Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(2) motion based on newly discovered evidence that an arbitrator who had resigned was, in fact, able to rejoin the arbitration panel prior to the district court's decision on whether to convene a new panel or order a replacement arbitrator, the order is affirmed where: 1) the rule articulated in Marine Products Export Corp. v. M.T. Globe Galaxy, 977 F.2d 66 (2d Cir. 1992) 150 that, absent "special circumstances," if a vacancy arises on an arbitral panel due to the death of an arbitrator prior to the rendering of an award, a new panel should be convened 150 does not apply to a vacancy occasioned by a resignation; and 2) in the instant case, the district court's decision either to reappoint the arbitrator who had resigned, or, in the alternative, to direct petitioner to appoint a replacement was proper pursuant to 9 U.S.C. section 5.

RLI Ins. Co. v. All Star Transp., Inc.

Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. D.C. Cir., Bankruptcy Law, Contracts, Insurance Law, Transportation) In an interpleader action by an insurance company to determine its obligations to pay truckers hired by its bankrupt insured under a surety bond, summary judgment for plaintiff-insurer is affirmed where Form BMC 84, which governed such bonds, plainly stated that the face value of the bond was the sum of $10,000 for all claims combined.

US Ex Rel. Miller v. Bill Harbert Int'l. Const., Inc.

Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. D.C. Cir., Civil Procedure, Construction, Contracts, Evidence, Government Contracts, Government Law) In a False Claims Act (FCA) action claiming that five companies and one individual rigged the bidding on three contracts in Egypt funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed in part where: 1) the government's claims concerning one contract were not barred by the statute of limitations because they related back to plaintiff's original timely complaint; 2) although the false claims provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act and the FCA did overlap, the two statutes were fully capable of coexisting. However, the judgment is reversed in part where: 1) certain of plaintiff's claims were barred by the statute of limitations because he added them after the limitation period had run; and 2) allowing the government to contradict a factual stipulation called into question the credibility of defendant's counsel, severely impeding counsel's ability to effectively advocate for his client.

Winnett v. Caterpillar, Inc.

Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 6th Cir., Civil Procedure, Contracts, ERISA, Health Law, Labor & Employment Law) In an interlocutory appeal brought by Caterpillar from the district court's decision preliminarily enjoining the company to provide a subclass of 275 plaintiffs who retired from a Caterpillar subsidiary between 1992 and 1998 with "lifetime cost-free retiree health care," the decision is reversed as the statute of limitations bars the claims of this subclass because the the claim accrued at least by 1998 when the union and the company reached a new labor agreement that altered the healthcare benefits available to retirees.

In re: Delta Airlines, Inc.

Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 2d Cir., Bankruptcy Law, Contracts, Tax Law) In creditors' appeal from a bankruptcy court's order upholding debtor's objections to their claims under tax indemnification agreements, the order is vacated where: 1) the bankruptcy court's construction of "pay" as that term was used in an agreement at issue nullified debtor's obligation to pay the "Owner Participant" under the agreement upon the occurrence most likely to call its provisions into play 150 the debtor's insolvency; and 2) the bankruptcy court effectively nullified the agreements by stripping them of their ability to protect the Owner Participant in the event of debtor's default.

Aryeh v. Canon Bus. Solutions, Inc.

Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Consumer Products, Contracts, Corporation & Enterprise Law) In plaintiff's suit brought under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), on behalf of himself and similarly situated persons who entered into copy rental agreements with defendant and who were overcharged for copies, trial court's judgment sustaining defendant's general demurrer without leave to amend is affirmed as plaintiff's UCL cause of action accrued more than four years before he filed his action, and the continuing violation doctrine does not apply to the circumstances of this case.

Rent-A-Center West, Inc. v. Jackson

Mon, 21 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S.S.C., Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Labor & Employment Law) In an employment discrimination action, the Ninth Circuit's reversal of the district court's dismissal of the action based on the parties' agreement to arbitrate is reversed where, under the Federal Arbitration Act, where an agreement to arbitrate includes an agreement that the arbitrator will determine the enforceability of the agreement, if a party challenges specifically the enforceability of that particular agreement, the district court considers the challenge, but if a party challenges the enforceability of the agreement as a whole, the challenge is for the arbitrator.