Weekly Opinion Summaries for Contracts

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 17, 2007
Triple Tee Golf, Inc. v. Nike, Inc., No. 05-10934, 05-11442
In a suit brought against Nike and others involving claims of misappropriation of trade secrets by certain golf clubs, summary judgment for Nike and related rulings are reversed in part where the district court erroneously disregarded the relevance of certain undisclosed patent applications by Nike to its evidentiary orders that laid the foundation for the grant of summary judgment. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 18, 2007
Dillard v. Starcon Int'l, Inc., No. 05-4790
In a workplace suit alleging racial discrimination, enforcement of an oral settlement agreement is affirmed where the magistrate judge did not abuse his discretion in holding that the parties had a meeting of the minds on all material terms essential to their settlement since all remaining points of contention were immaterial. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 18, 2007
Enderlin v. XM Satellite Radio Holdings, Inc., No. 06-3420
In an action brought against XM Radio claiming violations of the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, denial of XM Radio's motion to dismiss or stay the proceedings pending arbitration is affirmed where a limited exception in the parties' contract applies so as to require the district court to resolve the threshold question of whether an arbitration clause itself was enforceable. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 16, 2007
Detabali v. St. Luke's Hosp., No. 05-15591
Dismissal of plaintiff's California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) claims against defendant-hospital and imposition of sanctions against plaintiff's attorney are reversed where: 1) the district court erred in finding that the FEHA employment discrimination and retaliation claims were preempted by the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), and consequently it lacked jurisdiction over the case; and 2) the district abused its discretion in imposing sanctions on attorney as his repleading of the FEHA claims, in contravention of the district court's instructions, preserved them for appeal and his decision clearly had merit. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 16, 2007
E. Bay Automotive Council v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., No. 04-74997, 04-75871, 05-71144
An affirmative bargaining order issued by the NLRB after nearly eight years of litigation involving employer-automotive dealer and a union is enforced over both the union's and employer's arguments that the NLRB's remedy in this case was either inadequate or inappropriate. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 16, 2007
Sanford v. MemberWorks, Inc., No. 05-55175
In an action alleging violations of 39 U.S.C. section 3009 and related state law claims arising from plaintiff's purchase of a set of fitness tapes by phone, an order confirming an arbitration award is affirmed in part, and vacated in part where: 1) plaintiff's appeal was timely; 2) the order compelling arbitration was erroneous as the district court failed to rule upon a contract formation issue before compelling arbitration; but 3) dismissal of claims against one defendant was proper as it never mailed unordered merchandise to plaintiff for purposes of section 3009, and there was no abuse of discretion in dismissing state law claims as to that defendant. Read more...

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 16, 2007
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cmty. Health Servs., Inc., No. 04-9605, 05-9523
In proceedings arising from a labor dispute, applications by the National Labor Relations Board to enforce twin orders against respondent-hospital operator are granted over claims that neither order should be enforced because both stemmed from issues already litigated in a prior Board proceeding or, alternatively, an affirmative bargaining order was improper and unwarranted. Read more...

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 18, 2007
Nimbus Techs., Inc. v. SunnData Prods., Inc., No. 06-10657
In dispute involving an LED tooling purchase agreement, summary judgment for defendants on plaintiff's claim for intentional interference with business relations, and holding that plaintiff may not hold one of defendants accountable for judgment against non-party creditor by piercing the corporate veil, are affirmed as: 1) under Alabama law, a plaintiff may not pierce the corporate veil against a creditor; and 2) plaintiff cannot establish an essential element of its intentional interference claim. Read more...

Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
Baylor Univ. v. Sonnichsen, No. 04-0851
In a employment dispute between Baylor University and a women's volleyball coach, a court of appeals' ruling finding that the coach presented sufficient evidence of a fraud claim and that the trial court abused its discretion by sustaining a special exception without giving him another opportunity to amend his pleadings is reversed where: 1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion by sustaining Baylor's special exception on breach of contract claims; and 2) it correctly granted summary judgment in favor of Baylor on the fraud claim. Read more...

Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
Gym-N-I Playgrounds, Inc. v. Snider, No. 05-0197
In a suit brought by tenant, playground equipment manufacturing company, against its landlord arising out of a building fire, summary judgment for landlord is affirmed where: 1) tenant's express disclaimer of commercial real estate landlord's implied warranty, that their premises are suitable for the tenants' intended commercial purposes, precluded their suit against the landlord for breach of the warranty; and 2) tenants' agreement to lease the commercial building "as is" prevents them from suing the landlord for other claims based on the property's condition. Read more...

Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
In re RLS Legal Solutions, LLC, No. 05-0290
A petition for mandamus to compel arbitration of an employment dispute is conditionally granted where the court of appeals erred in holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying employer's motion to compel arbitration of the dispute on the basis that relators used economic duress to force the plaintiff to agree to arbitration. Read more...

Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
Baylor Univ. v. Coley, No. 04-0916
In an action claiming that plaintiff's former employer-university breached her contract and forced her to resign from her tenured faculty position by reassigning her responsibilities to others and effectively demoting her, a court of appeals' ruling in favor of plaintiff is reversed where plaintiff presented no evidence the university breached her contract and the jury was properly charged on constructive discharge. Read more...

Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
State of Texas v. Holland, No. 05-0292
A takings claim is not the proper avenue for a patentholder who performs services under contract with the state to assert patent rights when the state's use is pursuant to colorable contract rights. Read more...

Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
In re Green, No. 06-0496
A court order to pay spousal support is unenforceable by contempt if the order merely restates a private debt rather than a legal duty imposed by Texas law. A petition for writ of habeas corpus is granted pursuant to a claim that petitioner could not be imprisoned for nonpayment of a contractual alimony obligation incorporated into his divorce decree. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, April 17, 2007
County of Amador v. City of Plymouth , No. C050066
In case involving plan of Indian tribe to build a world-class gaming facility on land it has the option to purchase, judgment granting a peremptory writ of mandate invalidating a Municipal Services Agreement (MSA) between intervenor-tribe and defendant-city is affirmed as the city's decision to enter into the MSA without complying with CEQA was void and, thus, the MSA and its support of the trust application of the tribe was invalid. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, April 18, 2007
Coral Constr. v. City & County of San Francisco, No. A107803
A decision striking down a San Francisco ordinance calling for race- and gender-conscious remedies to ameliorate the effects of past discrimination in public contracting is affirmed in part where: 1) a state constitutional amendment adopted via the California Civil Rights Initiative is not preempted by a human rights treaty ratified by Congress; 2) it also does not offend the Hunter/Seattle political restructuring arm of equal protection jurisprudence; and 3) the ordinance is not required to maintain the City’s eligibility for federal funds. However, the matter is remanded for further proceedings where the trial court failed to adjudicate the question of whether the ordinance is mandated by the federal Constitution as a narrowly tailored remedial program to remedy ongoing, pervasive discrimination in public contracting. Read more...

Table of Contents