117 results for 'cat:"Evidence" AND cat:"Contract"'.
J. Traum finds for an insurer on an insured's action seeking coverage for an offroad ATV accident on the presumption the ATV was covered under his homeowner's umbrella policy. Though the same agent handled the umbrella policy as well as the separate ATV policy, nothing in the record indicates the ATV is covered under the umbrella policy or that the insured party was told so.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Traum , Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv419, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: evidence, Insurance, contract
J. Horan finds that a janitorial company did not violate the terms of all the individual contracts that a contracting agency terminated for failure to perform and other violations. The contracting agency’s evidence against the janitorial company indicating contract violations pertaining only to specific contracts cannot be extended as a reason to terminate all of the separate contracts for which the janitorial company brings the claims.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Horan, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv94, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: evidence, contract
J. Garcia finds that the lower court improperly granted declaratory relief to the appellee in this breach of contract lawsuit arising from a supplier subcontractor agreement. The evidence shows that a certain email termination was effective "under the substantial-compliance doctrine." The appellant does not establish, however, that the termination defeated the appellee's contract claims. Reversed in part.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Garcia, Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: 05-22-00752-CV, Categories: evidence, 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. Tijerina finds that the lower court properly ruled in favor of the city in this breach of contract case arising from an agreement to perform certain road improvements. On appeal, the construction companies contend that the evidence is insufficient to establish their breach of the contract. But the evidence showed a "failure to adhere to the progress schedule." Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Tijerina, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 13-22-00416-CV, Categories: evidence, Damages, contract
J. Morrison denies the medical provider's motion for summary judgment, ruling undisputed facts show it prevented the claim recovery company from accessing its billing systems following a dispute about the parties' contract, which is sufficient for the breach of contract claim to proceed.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Morrison, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv1501, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: evidence, Health Care, contract
J. Oliver grants the hydration patch manufacturer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the patch developer's contract and fraud claims fail because it never made a purchase order under the parties' supply agreement that would have required the manufacturer to produce the patches, while the manufacturer also never signed the agreement, which renders it void.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Oliver, Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv618, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: evidence, contract
J. Arterburn finds the district court improperly dismissed the swimming pool owner's breach of contract suit. The owner did not sign the third page of the pool remodel contract, which included the forum selection clause, and the court did not consider evidence relevant to whether an exception barred the clause's enforcement. Reversed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Arterburn , Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: A-23-572, Categories: evidence, Jurisdiction, contract
J. Murphy finds the circuit court properly dismissed the ex-husband's motion for modification of support and alimony. Though the husband's income decreased, and he says there is no longer a need for the obligation since the wife's income has increased, he is still capable of meeting the obligation. The court correctly found, and the record supports, the wife still has a need for support “to maintain the...lifestyle for [her]...children." Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Murphy , Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: CV-23-315, Categories: evidence, Family Law, contract
J. Smith finds that the lower court improperly granted a no-evidence summary judgment to the appellee in this breach of contract and conversion case brought by his former employers. The lower court abused its discretion by "rejecting, and not considering, appellants' filing," which prevented them from properly presenting their evidence. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Smith, Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 05-23-00323-CV, Categories: Civil Procedure, evidence, contract
J. Schmehl denies in part a foam insulation company’s motion to dismiss a pipe company’s intellectual property complaint arising from a botched product development agreement and potential acquisition between parties whose relationship eventually soured. The pipe company’s expert report contains potentially problematic accounting practices at the insulation company that create genuine disputes of material fact for trial.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Schmehl, Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 5:21cv5077, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: evidence, Property, contract
J. Alvord finds the lower court properly granted the insurer's motion for summary judgment. The flashing defects discovered in the modular home were not property damage, but proved only that property damage may occur in the future, which was insufficient to trigger coverage under its policy with the builder. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Alvord, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: AC45433, Categories: evidence, Insurance, contract
J. Lindsay finds for defendant regarding evidence in breach of contract claims brought by a former CEO, who resigned after being recorded making controversial racial statements, because the CEO must disclose information about his alcohol abuse and treatment after he opened the door by denying using alcohol at the time he made the statements.
Court: USDC Western District of Kentucky, Judge: Lindsay, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv3, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: evidence, Discovery, contract
J. Gladwin finds the county court properly found the parties had a valid and enforceable marriage. After the husband's hospitalization for Covid-19, he returned home to find money in a bank account he had entrusted to his wife was gone. He filed for divorce and the wife denied the parties had been married. Evidence shows the parties held themselves out to the community at large as a married couple. The presumption of a lawful marriage exists when a couple who have lived together for a considerable time and hold each other out to the public as husband and wife. The property division is based on sufficient evidence. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gladwin , Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: CV-23-127, Categories: evidence, Family Law, contract
J. Bustamante finds the trial court properly ruled in favor of the limousine business owner on claims for breach of contract brought by the attorney who loaned the business money in its startup phase. Although the parties signed separate agreements regarding the loan and profit-sharing for the attorney, the documents were signed at the same time as part of the same venture and, therefore, constituted a single contract. Additionally, the attorney's assertion he would release the owner from the profit-sharing obligations if he paid the loan off in full was a binding agreement that terminated the contract when the loan was paid off; therefore, the business owner has no further obligation under the arrangement. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Bustamante, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: A-1-CA-40031, Categories: evidence, contract
J. Gaughan denies, in part, the gun part supplier's motion for summary judgment, ruling that while it is undisputed it shipped all required parts under the "gas key" agreement with the gun manufacturer, it was made aware of defects with several shipments and, therefore, there are questions of fact as to whether it fully performed and was entitled to payment under the contract.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Gaughan, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv1471, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: evidence, Firearms, contract
J. Barbier grants a request by a FEMA contractor conducting post-hurricane disaster mitigation work, dismissing breach of contract claims totaling $129,000 by a subcontractor hired to clear mud and debris. The amount in dispute arose from work the subcontractor’s workers mistakenly performed at the direction of an individual who turned out to be representing another subcontractor at the same work site. The subcontractor sent corresponding invoices to the disaster mitigation business only to discover the FEMA contractor was not invoicing or receiving payment for the litigant-subcontractor's services. A mistake by one company’s employees is not enough to show the contract had been orally modified.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Barbier, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1580, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Employment, evidence, contract
J. Drell grants summary judgment to a Texas-based corrugated packaging company, dismissing breach of contract claims by a transportation service in Mississippi. The proposed written contract for warehousing services and its terms are unenforceable, and the corrugated packaging company in Texas did not promise the Mississippi company a three-year term for warehousing services.
Court: USDC Western District of Louisiana , Judge: Drell, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv445, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: evidence, Business Practices, contract
J. McFarland denies both parties' motion for summary judgment on the contract claim brought by the car dealership, ruling that while its lease agreement with the cab company allowed it to demand the full amounts of loans following a single missed payment, the cab company's obligations under the agreement may have been waived if the dealership charged it for the lease of vehicles that were never actually leased; therefore, there is a question of fact that must be submitted to a jury.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: McFarland, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv386, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: evidence, Vehicle, contract
J. Fallon grants summary judgment to a New Orleans area river transportation company on its argument any liability it may incur for damage to steel coils shipped from Korea is limited to no more than $500 per coil, pursuant to provisions of a barge transportation agreement with an intermediary hired to transport the cargo from New Orleans to Illinois and Ohio. Because both barge transportation companies expressly agreed to the terms, the New Orleans-based business may enforce the limitation provision.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Fallon, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv27, NOS: Marine - Contract, Categories: evidence, Maritime, contract
J. Morrison grants the policyholder's motion for summary judgment on the interpretation of the deductible provision in its policy with the insurance companies, ruling ambiguous language requires the use of extrinsic evidence and testimony from an individual heavily involved in procuring the policies supports the policyholder's interpretation. Specifically, even though only a single manufacturing facility was damaged by the fire, the business losses of the company must be calculated using losses from all of the facilities, which are interconnected.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Morrison, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv2019, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: evidence, Insurance, contract
J. Bury rules an "avid art collector" may pursue insurance claims for a stolen Rolex watch, but not for the alleged theft of Andy Warhol and Keith Haring works of art. The insurance company sufficiently showed in court that the art collector did not actually owned the works of art, but may be entitled to obtain coverage for the watch.
Court: USDC Arizona, Judge: Bury, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 4:21cv119, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: evidence, Insurance, contract
J. Barrett finds the trial court properly entered summary judgment in favor of the mining company. A partner in the crystal mine brought this lawsuit seeking damages for an alleged breach of a nondisparaging agreement in a previous settlement providing for liquidated damages of $250,000 if the settlement was breached. The record shows no evidence the partner made reasonable efforts to secure another partner's deposition, and a resulting affidavit testifying to certain statements regarding alleged thievery, in breach of the nondisparaging agreement, is hearsay. The residual-hearsay exception is not applicable being that no compelling reason for attaching more than average credibility to the hearsay has been shown. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Barrett , Filed On: March 6, 2024, Case #: CV-23-211, Categories: evidence, Damages, contract
J. Traum grants the equipment rental company's motion for summary judgment in its employment agreement-related against a former sales rep. The sales rep was hired pursuant to a noncompetition agreement and began communicating with a competitor about job opportunities after having a dispute with his supervisor. After this, the sales rep requested a copy of the agreement to ensure that he was complying with all restrictive covenants and created a 103-page list of customers by taking screenshots of customer information. Sufficient evidence supports the judgment.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Traum , Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv2190, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Commerce, evidence, contract
J. Vascura grants the shingle manufacturer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the homeowners have produced no expert testimony or other evidence to support their claim the shingles installed at their home were defective. Rather, the majority of their claims relate to the improper installation of the shingles by the roofing company; therefore, the manufacturer cannot be held liable.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Vascura, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv3231, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: evidence, Product Liability, contract