Paul Ferrer—Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
Well-established contract law holds that when one party breaches a contract, the nonbreaching party must make reasonable efforts to mitigate its damages. The consequences of failing to mitigate are well illustrated by a recent Illinois appellate decision. See Mayster v. Santacruz, 2020 IL App (2d) 190840, 163 N.E.3d 246.
The plaintiff owned and operated a Mathnasium math tutoring franchise. The franchisee entered into a binding purchase agreement to sell the franchise for $100,000. The parties bickered over several terms, but the disagreement did not justify the buyer's termination, which therefore constituted a breach. Soon after the breach, however, the buyer offered to reinstate the deal and buy the franchise for the same $100,000 originally agreed. The franchisee refused, choosing instead to raise the asking price to $130,000 to explore more profitable opportunities. The franchisee also declined the franchisor's suggestion that it advertise the franchise for sale in an internal publication that targeted Mathnasium owners, and would thus have been more likely to produce a new buyer. The trial court concluded that the buyer had breached the contract but that the franchisee could not recover any damages based on its absolute failure to mitigate. The only questions presented on appeal were whether the franchisee had failed to mitigate its damages and, if so, whether its failure barred it from recovering anything at all.
Read More
Topics:
contracts,
Paul A. Ferrer,
failure to mitigate,
no recovery of damages
Paul Ferrer, Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
The Virginia Supreme Court's recent decision in Flint Hill School v. McIntosh, No. 181678, 2020 WL 33258 (Va. Jan. 2, 2020), seems to provide some support for the old adage that "bad facts make bad law." In that case, the McIntoshes enrolled their minor child in Flint Hill School, a private school in Fairfax County, Virginia. The McIntoshes signed an enrollment contract in which they agreed to pay "all attorneys' fees and costs" incurred by the school "in any action arising out of or relating to this Enrollment Contract." Significantly, the provision did not require that the school be the prevailing party in order to recover its attorneys' fees. As the Virginia Supreme Court pointed out, the practical effect of such a provision, if applied as written, is essentially to foreclose all litigation on the contract.
Read More
Topics:
contracts,
Paul A. Ferrer,
contract of adhesion,
meaningful alternatives,
common law of unconscionability,
procedural unconscionability
Anne Hemenway, Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
The economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic and the sudden and worldwide shuttering of large and small businesses may be felt for a long time. One of the resulting issues is the applicability of a force majeure clause, or common-law impossibility, frustration of purpose, or commercial impracticability excuses for contract performance and obligations. Force majeure clauses come into effect when events occurring beyond the control of the parties prevent performance of contract obligations. Some contracts include specific force majeure events that will excuse performance at this time, such as a pandemic (the World Health Organization declared a pandemic on March 11, 2020) or when governmental or administrative action is taken that disrupts or precludes performance under a contract.
Read More
Topics:
contracts,
Anne B. Hemenway,
COVID-19,
force majeure clause,
frustration of purpose,
excuse for performance
Anne Hemenway—Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
In Return Mail, Inc. v. USPS, 139 S. Ct. 1853 (2019), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a federal agency is not considered a "person" for purposes of seeking review of the validity of a patent under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011 ("AIA"), 35 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq. The AIA, enacted on September 16, 2011, changed the patent system from a first-to-invent to a first-inventor-to-file system. The transition to a first-to-file system took place over a period of approximately 18 months.
The AIA also created the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and established three types of administrative review proceedings before the Board. See 35 U.S.C. § 6. The reviews include an "inter partes review," a "post-grant review," and a "covered-business-method" ("CBM") review. See id. §§ 311, 321.
Read More
Topics:
Anne B. Hemenway,
validity,
patents,
first-inventor-to-file system
Amy G. Gore—Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provide that “[t]o maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology.” Model Rules of Prof’l Conduct R. 1.1 cmt. 8. Maintaining computer security is both a business responsibility and an ethical obligation for all lawyers. Additionally, attorneys are charged with the ethical obligation to make reasonable efforts to prevent the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of, or unauthorized access to, information relating to the representation of a client. Id. R. 1.6(c). The need for attorneys to maintain current security protocols for the technology used in their offices has never been more pressing.
Computer “hackers” have infiltrated thousands of computer systems from private individuals to government entities, and litigation firms have increasingly been targeted. A recent article highlights the story of several firms involved in litigation arising out of the 9/11 attack, including the ransoming of sensitive and confidential information that had been on the firms' systems.
Read More
Topics:
Amy Gore,
unauthorized disclosure,
ethical obligations of attorneys,
computer security,
security protocols,
safeguards
Alistair Edwards—Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA” or the “Act”) makes it unlawful “to make any call . . . using any automatic telephone dialing system . . . to any telephone number assigned to a . . . cellular telephone service.” 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii).
In Maes v. Charter Communication, No. 18-cv-124-jdp, 2018 WL 5619199 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 30, 2018), the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin recently considered whether a predictive dialer constituted an autodialer (an automatic dialing system) under the TCPA. In that case, the telemarketer called the plaintiff using a predictive dialer, a piece of equipment used in call centers to automatically dial phone numbers and connect representatives to customers that answer the phone. When the plaintiff answered phone calls from the telemarketer, he heard silence before the phone system connected him with a representative. The plaintiff then proceeded to sue the telemarketer under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii), which prohibits making “any call . . . using any automated telephone dialing system . . . to any telephone number assigned to a . . . cellular telephone service.”
Read More
Topics:
Alistair D. Edwards,
Telephone Consumer Protection Act,
autodialer,
cellular service,
telemarketing
Lee Dunham—Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
Student debt is the second-largest source of U.S. household debt, at nearly $1.4 trillion. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Quarterly Report on Household Debt and Credit (accessed on Nov. 10, 2018). It is projected that nearly 40% of student loan borrowers will default by 2023. Judith Scott-Clayton, The Looming Student Loan Default Crisis Is Worse Than We Thought (accessed on Nov. 10, 2018). Many attorneys have seen increased requests for student loan advice.
Because students are often young and legally unsophisticated at the time they borrow, many understand little about their contracts, or have lost—or never obtained—copies of the essential documents. The first step in such circumstances is to have the client contact the servicer to request copies of the promissory note and related documents, payment history, name and address of the current lender, and documentation of any transfers.
Read More
Topics:
contracts,
Lee Dunham,
default on loan,
student debt,
obtaining essential documents
Anne Hemenway—Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
Courts are reluctant to enforce prepetition automatic stay waivers, but will not rule out the possibility of enforcement. Often found as a clause in a forbearance agreement, prepetition automatic stay waivers are therefore not per se unenforceable, notwithstanding the fact that their close relative, prepetition waivers of bankruptcy filings, are per se unenforceable. See In re Simpson, Case No. 17-10442, 2018 WL 1940378 (Bankr. D. Vt. Apr. 23, 2018). Generally, courts will hold that the debtor must carry the burden of proving that such contractual waivers should not be enforced. In re A. Hirsch Realty, LLC, 583 B.R. 583 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2018).
Read More
Topics:
bankruptcy,
Anne Hemenway,
prepetition automatic stay waivers,
preclusive effect,
forebearance waiver
Charlene Hicks—Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
To date, no consensus has been reached among courts throughout the United States on the question as to whether a creditor’s issuance of an IRS Form1099-C results in the extinguishment of the reported debt in favor of the debtor. Form 1099-C bears the title “Cancellation of Debt,” and, according to the IRS, a creditor should issue this form to the debtor for any year in which a debt is cancelled. Depending on the state in which the debtor resides, a creditor’s issuance of a Form 1099-C may have the effect of barring further collection efforts and of completely discharging the reported debt.
Read More
Topics:
creditor's rights,
Charlene J. Hicks,
IRS Form 1099-C,
extinguishment of debt,
discharge of debt
Charlene Hicks—Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
Although the law generally does not allow a contracting party to bring a tort claim against another party to the same contract, this protection does not extend to persons or entities that are classified as "strangers" to the contract. Thus, a contracting party may maintain a viable claim for tortious interference with contractual relations against a stranger to the agreement. In practice, however, the performance of a contract is often contingent on the acts and approval of persons or entities that did not formally enter into the agreement. This makes it difficult to distinguish between a protected contracting "party" and an unprotected "stranger."
The popular Trader Joe's grocery chain recently found itself pushed into the murky realm of being classified as a "stranger" to a contract between two parties to which Trader Joe's had close business ties. In Redfearn v. Trader Joe's Co., 20 Cal. App. 5th 989, ___ Cal. Rptr. 3d ___ (2018), the evidence showed that Caliber Sales and Marketing Corporation, a food broker, entered into contracts with various manufacturers of food products and attempted to place those food products in Trader Joe's stores. Trader Joe's worked with Caliber in finding new products for its stores. Caliber's assignee alleged that a Trader Joe's executive falsely accused Caliber of spreading a rumor that the store's employees were soliciting bribes from brokers and that this false accusation tarnished Caliber's professional reputation to such an extent as to cause two food suppliers to terminate their contracts with Caliber to supply food products to Trader Joe's.
Read More
Topics:
contracts,
tortious interference with contract,
stranger to a contract,
intentional and negligent interference