Case Summaries

Commercial Law

[03/02] Waterproofing Sys., Inc. v. Hydro-Stop, Inc.
Preliminary injunction for plaintiff in a suit regarding the untimely termination of a distribution agreement is affirmed where the magistrate judge's opinion, that the defendant did not have just cause to terminate the agreement, was without clear error.

[03/01] Networkip LLC v. Spread Enterprises., Inc.
Summary judgment of liability and final judgment of damages in favor of plaintiff in an intentional interference and third-party beneficiary action arising out of the sale of multi-national telephone minutes are reversed and summary judgment is entered for the defendant where the original judgments were erroneous as a matter of law.

[02/28] Texaco v. Dagher
It is not per se illegal under section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. section 1, for a lawful, economically integrated joint venture to set the prices at which it sells its products.

[02/27] N. Ins. Co. of New York v. Derma Clinic Inc.
Questions of law are certified to Connecticut's supreme court involving insurance coverage for claims arising from an alleged physical and sexual assault that occurred during the course of a massage performed by an employee of a business offering massage therapy.

[02/23] United Air Lines, Inc. v. Ins. Co. of the State of Pennsylvania
Summary judgment for defendant-insurer on plaintiff's claims for lost earnings arising from the September 11 terrorist attacks is affirmed where the losses were not covered under the policy since plaintiff cannot show that the lost earnings at issue resulted from physical damage to its property or from physical damage to an adjacent property.

[02/21] Am. Trucking Ass'ns, Inc. v. Whitman
Emergency highway safety regulations of the New Jersey Department of Transportation requiring specified vehicles with neither an origin nor a destination in the state to use the national network of interstate highways, as opposed to state highways and roads, violate the dormant Commerce Clause.

[02/20] Krontz v. City of San Diego
Suspension of a nude entertainment establishment's operating permit as a sanction for violating a regulation is affirmed where the suspension: 1) was not an invalid prior restraint, 2) was a constitutional time, place, and manner restriction, 3) was not a constitutionally impermissible injunction, and 4) did not violate due process.

[02/16] Premiere Network Servs., Inc. v. SBC Communications, Inc.
47 U.S.C. section 207 is an election-of-remedies provision with regards to claims against telecommunications carriers. Once an election is made by either filing a complaint with the FCC or filing a complaint in federal court, a party may not thereafter file a complaint on the same issues in the alternative forum, regardless of the status of the complaint.

[02/16] United Haulers Ass'n, Inc. v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Mgmt. Auth.
Summary judgment for defendants in a challenge under the dormant Commerce Clause to certain counties' municipal flow control ordinances is affirmed since, even if the ordinances were found to burden interstate commerce, the burden imposed would not be clearly excessive in relation to the local benefits conferred by the ordinances.

[02/15] Sosa v. DIRECTV, Inc.
Judgment of the district court holding defendant, a satellite television broadcaster, immune from liability under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine and dismissing plaintiffs' complaint is affirmed since RICO does not unambiguously include defendant's presuit demand letters within the scope of conduct it enjoins.

[02/15] Jauregui v. Bobb's Piano Sales & Service Inc.
The purchaser of non-conforming goods retains the option to claim either: (1) the difference in value or, (2) the right to cancel the deal and recover the amount he paid in return for the item.

[02/14] Financial Acquisition Partners LP v. Blackwell
Dismissal of a complaint in a putative class action for securities fraud pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) is affirmed over challenges regarding: 1) a finding on collateral estoppel; 2) the striking of certain opinions from an expert's affidavit; 3) the PSLRA's pleading requirements; and 4) denial of leave to amend the complaint.

[02/13] Square D Co Subsidiaries v. CIR
Under Treasury Regulation Section 1.267(a)-3, deductions by a subsidiary to a parent company for interest payments must be taken when the interest payments were actually made, not simply when they accrued, if the related payee conducts its accounting using the cash method, even if it reports on the accrual basis.

[02/09] Gil v. Bank of Am.
The California Uniform Commercial Code supersedes a payee's common law cause of action for negligence where the collecting bank accepted a check with a missing indorsement.

[02/09] Kroger Co. v. Malease Foods Corp.
An order requiring defendant to convey its leasehold interest in certain properties to plaintiff pursuant to a finding that plaintiff had properly exercised purchase options on the properties is vacated where the district court erroneously denied defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.

[02/08] Roger Edwards, LLC v. Fiddes & Son Ltd.
Imposition of Rule 11 sanctions on plaintiff in commercial litigation is affirmed over plaintiff's meritless or unpreserved claims of error.

[02/07] Deiter v. Microsoft Corp.
Order certifying a class of consumers seeking damages against a software manufacturer in antitrust litigation and excluding from the class certain "Enterprise" customers of the software at issue is affirmed where the representative parties' claims were not typical of the claims of the enterprise customers.

[02/06] In re Copper Antitrust Litig.
Summary judgment pursuant to a statute of limitations in an antitrust case involving allegations of manipulations of the copper market is reversed in part where the facts taken in the light most favorable to plaintiffs could support a finding that a portion of their suit was timely.

[02/01] Crawford v. Weather Shield Mfg., Inc.
Order granting a new trial and judgment of the trial court in a construction defect case involving a window manufacturer are affirmed where there was no abuse of discretion in the grant of a new trial, the trial court correctly interpreted and adjudicated the subcontract at issue, and there was no abuse of discretion as to attorneys' fees.

[01/18] O'Neill v. Town of Middletown
Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in a challenge to a municipality's decisions involving rezoning and a subdivision approval to allow for the construction of a retail store is granted conditional to their subsequent cure of the lack of a properly supported record to demonstrate their standing to challenge the rezoning.

Back to Main