Case Summaries

Contracts

[08/27] County of Santa Clara v. Astra USA, Inc.
In a lawsuit brought by certain federally funded medical clinics claiming that they have been overcharged for certain prescription drugs in violation of pharmaceutical pricing agreements between the Secretary of Health and Human Services and drug manufacturer defendants, dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim is reversed where plaintiffs are intended direct beneficiaries of those agreements and thus had the right to enforce the agreements' discount provisions against the manufacturers and sue them for reimbursement of excess payments.

[08/27] Gander Mountain Co. v. Cabela's, Inc.
In a case arising from a contract dispute involving a 1996 transaction between the parties, summary judgment for plaintiff on a counterclaim, finding that a provision at issue was unenforceable because it was merely an agreement to agree, is affirmed over claims that the district court violated the law-of-the-case doctrine and erred in granting summary judgment.

[08/27] Fidelity and Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Star Equip. Corp.
In a dispute arising over a construction contract, enforcement of a settlement agreement and grant of summary judgment are affirmed where: 1) a hand-written agreement contemplated execution of a more formal agreement does not preclude enforcement of the hand-written agreement; 2) the terms of this settlement were clear and unambiguous; 3) there was no error in the district court's order enforcing the Settlement Memorandum of Agreement as a settlement agreement that disposed of all the claims in the case except the indemnification dispute; and 4) Fidelity is entitled to indemnification because defendants failed to present any material facts which would give rise to a factual dispute as to a 'want of good faith' on the part of Fidelity.

More...

Corporation & Enterprise Law

[08/26] Brady v. UBS Fin. Servs., Inc.
In a suit brought against one company and another which plaintiff contended was its alter ego for payment on certain bonds issued by defendant, dismissal of the claims is reversed where: 1) plaintiff acquired a right to sue on the Stated Maturity of his bond and that remedy was not time barred; and 2) furthermore, plaintiff's claims are not barred by res judicata.

[08/26] Grynberg v. Total S.A.
In two suits against oil companies raising tort claims for breach of fiduciary duty and equitable claims for unjust enrichment involving potential oil and gas reserves in Kazakhstan, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where the claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations and laches.

[08/26] Mamot Feed Lot & Trucking v. Hobson
In a class action raising federal usury and antitying claims against a bank, its holding company, and various shareholders, officers, and employees of the bank, following the criminal indictment of the bank's president for defrauding the bank of nearly one million dollars, dismissal of the claim is affirmed where: 1) as sections 85 and 86 do not apply to state-chartered banks, the district court properly dismissed those claims brought under the National Bank Act for want of jurisdiction; 2) the district court properly dismissed a claim under 12 U.S.C. section 1831d for failure to state a claim; and 3) the complaint provided absolutely no facts to support an illegal tying claim.

More...