WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on April 30 denied review of a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Winstar ruling that dismissed a bank's breach of contract claims against the U.S. government regarding more than $13 million in losses the bank sustained when the thrift in which the bank invested was taken over by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. during the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s (First Annapolis Bancorp Inc. v. United States of America, No. 11-912, U.S. Sup.).
DETROIT - Citing evidence that a trademark infringement defendant's website "welcomed Michigan customers and enabled them to enter into contracts for the purchase of goods," a federal judge on April 30 denied dismissal of a dispute (Masco Corp. of Indiana d/b/a Delta Faucet Company v. Delta Imports LLC, No. 11-14720, E.D. Mich.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59979).
LOS ANGELES - A California appeals court on April 26 in an unpublished opinion affirmed that plaintiffs suing a hospital for breach of contract involving health insurance payments failed to allege any factual basis for recoverable damages (Clinton B. Eull III, et al. v. Providence Little Company of Mary, No. B227903, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 3; 2012 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 3161).
TACOMA, Wash. - A Washington federal judge on April 25 denied a motion for preliminary injunction in a case in which Medicaid managed care organization (MCO) providers are seeking to stop the state's Medicaid administrator from entering into contracts with new MCOs (Columbia United Providers Inc., et al. v. State of Washington, Health Care Authority, No. C12-5174BHS, W.D. Wash.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58105).-->
SANTA ANA, Calif. - A federal judge in California on April 25 declined to dismiss a breach of contract count arising from appraisal services in a suit filed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. as the receiver for Washington Mutual Bank (WaMu), finding that a written contract requirement was designed only to protect the bank (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. LSI Appraisal LLC, et al., No. 11-00706, C.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58008).
ATLANTA - In an April 25 per curiam ruling, an 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held that Georgia law "does not recognize an independent cause of action for breach of good faith and fair dealing," affirming the dismissal of a policyholder's breach of contract claim against its employers liability insurer based on an allegation of bad faith (Cone Financial Group Inc. v. Employers Insurance Company of Wausau, No. 11-14078, 11th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8270).
SAN ANTONIO - There is a material issue of fact regarding which hailstorm caused property damage to two Austin, Texas, apartment complexes owned by an insured, a Texas appeals panel held April 25, reversing and remanding a trial court's final judgment as to the insured's breach of contract claims against its primary and excess insurers (United States Fire Insurance Company v. The Lynd Company, No. 04-11-00347-CV, Texas App., 4th Dist.; 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 3206).
SAN DIEGO - A federal judge in California on April 24 granted the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s motion to substitute another party in place of itself as plaintiff in a suit in which the FDIC, as the receiver for a failed bank, sued defendants for alleged breach of contract on a loan but later sold interest in the loan to another party (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Acting as Receiver for La Jolla Bank, FSB v. CG 80, LLC, et al., No. 11-02165, S.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57382).
TUCSON, Ariz. - An Arizona federal judge on April 23 rejected a couple's attempt to remand their breach of contract and bad faith complaint against their insurer to state court, holding that it did not qualify as a "direct action" under U.S. Code Title 28, Section 1332(c)(1) (Douglas and Juanita Camps v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., No. 4:11-cv-00662, D. Ariz.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56302).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. - The Fourth District California Court of Appeal on April 20 affirmed summary judgment for a construction company named as a third-party defendant in a suit over a defective storm drain system, concluding that the company is not responsible because of an indemnity provision in the construction contract (Admar Management Co., et al. v. C.P. Construction Company Inc., No. E052207, Calif. App., 4th Dist.; 2012 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2980).
MOUNT VERNON, Ill. - The Fifth District Illinois Appellate Court on April 20 affirmed a trial court decision involving an alleged breach of a construction contract, concluding that the plaintiff was seeking a disproportionate amount of damages compared to the original contract price (Bill Bailey v. Terry Keeton, et al., No. 5-10-0612, Ill. App., 5th Dist.; 2012 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 911).
DALLAS - A federal judge in Texas on April 17 partially granted a motion to dismiss a suit filed against defendants including Bank of America NA alleging breach of contract, violations of a state debt collection practices act and other claims arising from the foreclosure sale of the plaintiff's property (Woods v. Bank of America, NA, et al., No. 11-01116 N.D. Texas; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54449).
PHILADELPHIA - A federal district court judge properly granted summary judgment to a hospital, its director of radiology and two radiologist physician groups on a radiologist's claims that an exclusive contract between the hospital and a physician group violated state and federal antitrust laws, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed April 17 in an unpublished opinion (George G. Bocobo, M.D., v. Radiology Consultants of South Jersey, P.A., et al., No. 07-3142, 3rd Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7642).
LOUISVILLE, Ky. - A Kentucky federal judge on April 18 granted a trading company's motion to compel arbitration in Singapore of a dispute over a series of contracts for the trade of scrap metal but denied a portion of the motion that sought to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction (Industrial Services of America Inc. v. Abcom Trading Pte. Ltd., et al., No. 11-709, W.D. Ky.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55135).
PHILADELPHIA - A Pennsylvania federal judge on April 17 granted in part an insurer's motion to dismiss a claim against it for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing and another seeking declaratory relief of indemnity, finding both to be duplicative of, and therefore precluded by, a corresponding breach of contract claim (Nova Financial Holdings Inc., et al. v. BancInsure Inc., No. 2:11-cv-07840, E.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53800).
GREENBELT, Md. - A federal magistrate judge in Maryland on April 17 ordered plaintiffs accusing a power company of negligence, breach of contract and detrimental reliance to produce some categories of documents after finding that they are not protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine (Izatullo Khosmukhamedov, et al. v. Potomac Electric Power Company, No. AW-11-449, D. Md.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53726).
ATLANTA - The 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 17 affirmed a $770,229 jury verdict for a commercial tilapia producer, finding that the trial court did not err in admitting expert testimony that the defendant's fish feed was limiting the fish's growth (Southern States Cooperative v. Melick Aquafeeds, Inc., et al., No. 11-12296, 11th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7653).
OAKLAND, Calif. - Finding that the plaintiffs in a purported class action over cost-per-click (CPC) advertising agreements with Facebook Inc. failed to establish "that questions of law or fact common to the class members predominate over questions affecting only individual members," a California federal judge on April 13 denied their motion to certify the class complaint for breach of contract and unfair business practices (In re Facebook Inc. PPC Advertising Litigation, No. 09-3043, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52512).
MIAMI - A federal judge in Florida on April 16 denied defendants' motion to dismiss a company's breach of contract claims against them in a credit card chargeback action, ruling that the company has standing to bring its claims (Swipe for Life, LLC v. XM Labs, LLC, et al., No. 10-22337, S.D. Fla.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53039).
PHOENIX - An Arizona resident's exposure to asbestos and, thus, his injury occurred in New Mexico, and its statute of repose applies to companies contracted to design, manufacture and install customized products, the Arizona Court of Appeals held April 17 (Vickie L. Pounders, et al. v. Enserch E&C Inc., et al., No. 1 CA-CV 11-0282, Ariz App., Div. 1; 2012 Ariz. App. LEXIS 53).
ST. LOUIS - A Missouri federal judge on April 17 granted a health plan administrator's request for expedited discovery in a contract dispute over the access of client information, saying the information would help the plaintiff prepare for a preliminary injunction hearing (Meritain Health Inc., et al. v. Express Scripts Inc., No. 12-266, E.D. Mo.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53827).
OAKLAND, Calif. - Dismissal of a shareholder class action lawsuit against Wells Fargo & Co. for breaching its contract by attempting to redeem on certain trust preferred securities is proper because the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act constituted a capital treatment event under the terms of the securities, a federal judge in California ruled April 12 (Daniel Call v. Wells Fargo & Co., et al., No. 11-5215, N.D. Calif.). Subscribers may view the order available within the full update.
DALLAS - A federal judge in Texas on April 16 granted in part a plaintiff's motion to compel discovery in a suit in which the plaintiff, which provided credit card marketing and distribution services to a defendant bank, asserts claims for breach of contract and the covenant of good faith (Marketing Investors Corporation v. New Millennium Bank, No. 11-01696, N.D. Texas; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52998).
SEATTLE - A Washington federal judge on April 13 declined to reconsider her ruling that an insurance broker did not owe a duty to an insured to advise it of the adequacy of insurance coverage for an aircraft damaged during a snowstorm and that the broker did not owe a duty to the insured based on contract or special relationship (SMS Services LLC v. HUB International Northwest LLC, No. 11-00336, W.D. Wash.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52529).
SEATTLE - A Washington federal judge on April 13 denied summary judgment to an insurer regarding the applicability of an exterior insulation and finish system (EIFS) exclusion, a contracted persons exclusion and a fungi or bacteria exclusion regarding a homeowner's allegations of insureds' defective work (Capitol Specialty Insurance Corp. v. Yuan Zhang, No. 11-41, W.D. Wash.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52549).