Defendants in a real estate development dispute could not introduce evidence of a post-breach crash in the real estate market to prove that the plaintiffs would not have profited from the parties’ contract, Maryland’s highest court has ruled in affirming judgment.
An expert could not testify that a plaintiff would have been “extraordinarily successful” had the defendant not breached the parties’ contract in support of a claim for over $1 billion in “lost profits” damages, the California Supreme Court has ruled.
Anyone who has gone to law school probably has some dim memory of being told that gambling contracts are generally unenforceable on public policy grounds.
But Tuesday a California court decided that a professional poker player just might have enforceable rights under an alleged oral agreement to stake another gambler.
An insurance company that provided foster care liability insurance did not owe a duty of good faith to a foster child who died from neglect, the 10th Circuit has ruled in affirming judgment.
Victorious plaintiffs in a breach of contract case thought they were in line for an award of attorney fees equal to what they owed their lawyer under a 25 percent contingency fee agreement.
They were wrong.
A jury has awarded $2 million to a man who developed a unique fuel additive several years ago and claimed his employer improperly phased him out of millions of dollars he was owed in a profit-sharing agreement.
A cigarette company may have made promises in advertising for a rewards program that customers could enforce in a breach of contract suit, the 9th Circuit has ruled in reversing a dismissal.
Parties to a business contract could not enforce an arbitration clause against another party to the agreement who filed for bankruptcy protection in response to being sued for fraud, the 9th Circuit has ruled in affirming judgment.
You always expect some glitches when your office upgrades its computer software, but when customer records go up in smoke, that’s a real nightmare. For one particularly unlucky dental office, the trouble was compounded by a limitation of liability clause in its software contract.
Last week, the Utah Supreme Court had to decide whether state product liability law prevents a software seller from enforcing such a clause.
A suit brought by court reporters against lawyers who protested court reporting fees on behalf of their clients is not barred under the state anti-SLAPP statute, the California Court of Appeal has ruled.