224 results for 'cat:"Damages" AND cat:"Contract"'.
J. Cole grants, in part, the seller's motion for summary judgment, ruling the buyer owes it more than $13,000 under the contract's post-closing adjustment holdback provision, which was binding on the parties, regardless of whether the seller disputed the working capital statement provided by the buyer. Meanwhile, the buyer is entitled to summary judgment on the fraud claim because not only is there no concrete evidence of false statements made after the deal was closed, but the seller failed to prove any harm came from the alleged misstatements about corporate assets.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: September 19, 2023, Case #: 1:18cv907, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Fraud, damages, contract
J. Torresen grants a former defendant's motion for judgment as a matter of law against an individual who previously sued her for breach of contract and promissory estoppel. A jury granted the individual $0.00 for her breach of contract claim and she argues that this is because the jury planned to award her damages for promissory estoppel, but because her contract claim and promissory estoppel claim were both based on a contract, a promissory estoppel claim doesn't apply.
Court: USDC Maine, Judge: Torresen, Filed On: September 19, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv107, NOS: Other Personal Property Damage - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Jury, damages, contract
J. Casper dismisses the insured company's suit against the insurance company because the insurance company's policy clearly states that it does not cover damages from a dishonored check unless it was issued by its insured, its insured's agent, or by someone impersonating its insured or its insured's agent, which is not the case here.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Casper, Filed On: September 19, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv11980, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, damages, contract
J. Sutton finds that although the employer's executive testified he had no knowledge of employees ever being gifted ownership shares in the company and that its policy was to buy all outstanding shares when an employee left the company, the trial court properly determined the former employee established ownership of stock shares. Not only did the employee's own testimony refute that of the executive, but he had physical ownership documents of the shares of stock. Furthermore, the trial court properly refused to increase damages, as the executive's testimony and supporting documentation regarding dividends provided by the company were sufficient to allow the court to properly calculate dividends owed to the former employee. Affirmed in part.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Sutton, Filed On: September 18, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-3291, Categories: damages, Conversion, contract
J. Kelly finds that the trial court improperly denied a company leave to amend the complaint to include claims seeking punitive damages because the company sufficiently pleaded the claim, and the court applied the incorrect legal standard. Reversed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Kelly, Filed On: September 15, 2023, Case #: 2D22-2454, Categories: damages, contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Davis denies the rail transportation company's motion for partial summary judgment. The rail transportation company and the track maintenance company agreed on a welding contract where the maintenance company would complete thermite welding on the transportation company's tracks. A train derailed, leaking hazardous materials after a rail fractured. The transportation company inspected the rail twice before the derailment and noticed no defects.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Virginia, Judge: Davis, Filed On: September 14, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv3, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Transportation, damages, contract
J. Guidry, ruling on remand from the Fifth Circuit, grants summary judgment to two sued insurers and against a New Orleans hotel operator and its general contractor regarding the proper meaning of a phrase in an insurance policy. The insurers are correct: the applicable deductible for the hotel’s flood claim, calculated as 5% of the value of the renovation project at the time of the flood, with a minimum of $500,000, is $3,443,475. There are no genuine disputes of material fact as to this issue. The insurers are entitled to summary judgment .
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Guidry, Filed On: September 14, 2023, Case #: 2:18cv1380, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Construction, damages, contract
J. Jones enters a second amended judgment, altered to reflect a total damages award of $690,852, in favor of the family in this breach of contract action alleging that the company lost money in spite of short-term bridge loans it had received. The company was extensively involved in a pattern of making false representations to the family and other lenders to induce them into believing that it was profitable. The company engaged in this pattern with malice, making punitive damages necessary.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Jones , Filed On: September 12, 2023, Case #: 3:19cv520, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Fraud, damages, contract
J. Milazzo denies summary judgment to a hospital on its argument for a mitigation of damages alleged by a patient nervous system monitoring service. The hospital alleges that the neuromonitoring business knew in early 2019 that a health insurer would not pay for part of its service and that it would need to seek reimbursement from the hospital, yet the litigant took no further action until late 2020 and continued to perform more than 500 surgeries at the facility during that time. The neuromonitoring business provides evidence that it was not aware that the insurer’s refusal to pay for its service was a result of the hospital’s breach of the business’s exclusive deal with the medical center until late 2020. A jury could find that the neuro-monitoring business acted reasonably to mitigate its damages.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Milazzo, Filed On: September 8, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv1489, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Health Care, damages, contract
J. Moll finds the trial court properly granted the seller's motion for summary judgment on the buyer's counterclaim for breach of contract. The asset purchase agreement between the parties clearly removed any liability from the seller regarding unemployment tax assessments, whether they were made before or after the buyer became successor owner of the business. However, the trial court erroneously admitted several checks mailed by the buyer after it was sued because the memo line on one check, which read "CCICW Settlement," was clearly an attempt by the buyer to settle the dispute and, therefore, could not be used as proof the seller failed to mitigate its damages. Therefore, the case will be remanded to determine the amount of interest owed to the seller. Affirmed in part.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Moll, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: AC44975, Categories: Tax, damages, contract
J. Van Tatenhove rules in part for plaintiff in this contract action by holding that, in light of the sixth circuit's ruling, the original judgment should be amended to include damages for unpaid royalties, retainer fees, and coal mine lease reimbursements.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Kentucky, Judge: Van Tatenhove, Filed On: August 30, 2023, Case #: 6:12cv91, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: damages, contract
J. Spain finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the passport services business on the individual's claims over its alleged delay in processing documents relating to the requested renunciation of his Indian passport. The individual failed to show the business violated the terms of the contract or prove any "recoverable damages" on the negligence claims. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Spain, Filed On: August 29, 2023, Case #: 14-22-00294-CV, Categories: damages, Negligence, contract
J. Chang grants an insurance policyholder’s motion for a declaration that this insurance dispute, over whether and what amount of coverage an insurance company owes the policyholder for his property’s ice damage, is best settled via an appraisal process.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Chang, Filed On: August 28, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv905, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, damages, contract
J. Rickman finds that the trial court improperly considered issues related to liability at a bench trial on damages after the homeowner's motion for default judgment was granted in a negligence and breach of contract action against the contractor. The trial court incorrectly considered the quality of the construction work before awarding the homeowner damages. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Rickman, Filed On: August 25, 2023, Case #: A23A0734, Categories: damages, Negligence, contract
J. Mendheim finds that the trial court wrongly calculated damages in a breach of contract suit between a homeowner and homebuyer, where the damages should have been calculated based on the house market value at the time of the breach of contract instead of the new appraisal market value. Reversed and remanded.
Court: Alabama Supreme Court, Judge: Mendheim, Filed On: August 25, 2023, Case #: SC-2022-0965, Categories: damages, Housing, contract
J. Wise finds that the trial court erred in its award of damages to the distributor on its breach of contract claim relating to a debt owed by a company for goods provided. The evidence did not support the part of the award for freight charges allegedly owed. Reversed in part.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Wise, Filed On: August 24, 2023, Case #: 14-20-00622-CV, Categories: Fraud, damages, contract
J. Boyle grants, in part, a food distributor's motion for attorney fees and interest in a breach of contract and guaranty case against a wholesaler, awarding it a total of $5.2 million. The guaranty at issue provides for certain rates, including prejudgment interest and attorney fees, and the rate is enforceable under Louisiana law.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Boyle, Filed On: August 24, 2023, Case #: 3:19cv1057, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: damages, Attorney Fees, contract
J. Guidry grants a request by a Louisiana-based insurance agency, dismissing the entity from a hurricane-damage suit brought by a suburban New Orleans realty company against a carrier in Ohio. The insured has made no allegation that the agency obtained the wrong type of policy or that it failed to account for a relevant history in making insurance recommendations. Therefore, the agency did not owe the insured a heightened duty of care nor did it fail to provide any insurance coverage requested by the realty company.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Guidry, Filed On: August 24, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv2883, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, damages, contract
J. Bell denies an insurance company its motion to sever itself from a trucking firm in a suit against both brought by a tire manufacturing company after $31 million of product was damaged in a windstorm. The manufacturing company stored its product in a warehouse provided by the firm, which agreed to replace any damaged goods, but following the wind storm, the firm refused to cover any damages. The insurance company removed the action to the federal district court without the firm's consent, but because the firm is also a legitimate party to the suit, it cannot be severed, so the case must be remanded.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Bell, Filed On: August 22, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv335, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, damages, contract
J. Moll finds the trial court properly denied the former partner's motion to dismiss a conversion action on statute of limitations grounds. Although more than three years passed between the initial suit filed by the company owner and the present dispute, the savings statute applied because the initial suit was brought by the company on behalf of the owner, a third party. However, the court erroneously calculated damages, as the owner was already awarded more than $8,000 for the partners' unauthorized withdrawal of $17,000 from the company checking account, which limited the damages available to the owner to $7,000, as all of the claims were related to the same occurrence. Affirmed in part.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Moll, Filed On: August 18, 2023, Case #: AC45318, Categories: damages, Conversion, contract
J. Kinsley finds the trial court properly granted the lenders' motion for summary judgment against the guarantor of the loans based on affidavits from the asset manager with firsthand knowledge of the loans, as well as the initial loan documents signed by the guarantor that rendered him personally liable in the event of a default. Meanwhile, although the trial court sua sponte altered its judgment to include damages against the guarantor, the decision did not violate his due process rights. He was given the opportunity to brief and argue the entirety of the case before the court's initial and amended decisions. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Kinsley, Filed On: August 11, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2784, Categories: damages, Due Process, contract
J. MacIver finds the trial court improperly barred the insured from amending her complaint against the insurance company over coverage for windstorm damages to her property to add a claim for punitive damages. The insured met the required standard of establishing a reasonable basis for it to be found that the insurance company intentionally misrepresents its coverage obligations and fails to properly investigate claims as general business practices, so she should have at least been allowed to argue a claim for punitive damages based on intentional misconduct even though the insurance company claims its misrepresentations were a mistake. Reversed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: MacIver, Filed On: August 11, 2023, Case #: 22-2334, Categories: Insurance, damages, contract
J. Urias denies summary judgment to an equipment services company because there is genuine dispute as to whether the person who brought this suit qualifies as an oil-and-gas “broker” or “consultant,” a detail that will ultimately determine whether his claims are barred by New Mexico’s fraud law after he sued the company for allegedly breaking an oral contract.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Urias, Filed On: August 10, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv715, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Fraud, damages, contract
J. Byrne finds that the trial court improperly ruled against a construction firm in a breach of contract case brought by a homeowner alleging that it improperly built a retaining wall on the property. The construction firm was not a party named in the contract signed by the homeowner; therefore, it cannot be held liable for the breach of contract claims. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Byrne, Filed On: August 9, 2023, Case #: 03-22-00457-CV, Categories: Property, damages, contract