Recently in Contract Law Category

Natasha Dallas made multiple mistakes when filling out the auto-draft payment form for an American General life insurance policy for her father. Alas, the insurance company never received her initial premium. Her father passed away a couple of weeks later. Dallas, who is also an insurance agent for American General, tried to retroactively make the premium payments. Her efforts were rebuffed and her claims denied.

Though we sympathize with her, Dallas' legal case is pretty clear-cut. Basic contract law requires consideration. Insurance policies are contracts. If consideration is never received, there is no contract. Case closed.

Of course, this is an appeals case. No appeals case can be that simple, right?

Pizza delivery is a fun gig, especially for those of us who love to drive while bumping hot jams. ("I [Drove] Myself Crazy" - don't judge). Unfortunately for drivers, many pizza places now tack on a "delivery charge" of a buck or two, which some customers mistake for an automatically-included gratuity. For those restaurants that do not split that fee with the drivers, that means the drivers get shafted.

Matt Luiken was one of those drivers. He worked for Domino's, which -- at the time -- charged a $1 per delivery fee. He sued on behalf of all similarly-situated pizza boys, claiming that the big D withheld these fees from the drivers illegally, as per Minnesota law, they are tips.

In 2002, Hallmark Cards, Inc. and Janet Murley parted ways. She had served as the vice-president of marketing and was responsible for product and business development, advertising, and research, and by extension, had access to confidential business plans, market research, and other internal information.

When she was let go, she was paid a severance of $735,000, 18 months of paid COBRA insurance, paid tax preparation for 2 years, and was given executive outplacement services. In exchange, she agreed to not work in the greeting card industry for 18 months, solicit Hallmark employees, disclose or use any propriety or confidential Hallmark information, or retain any Hallmark records or documents. She also waived any claims against Hallmark arising from her termination.

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals offered two important lessons for contract disputes this week.

First, choice of venue clauses are sometimes mere suggestions.

Second, res judicata can be raised in a motion to dismiss.

We get a fair number of junk faxes at our office. Our fax machine is next to the paper recycling bin, so it’s easy to toss them and forget about them. Because that’s what most people do.

Most people are tossing out a veritable gold mine; under the Junk Fax Act, they could be suing and collecting damages for those unwanted faxes.

Before you shudder at the thousands of dollars you’re losing by simply ignoring your in-house money press fax machine, just think about the money you’re saving insurance companies. Yes, insurers have to indemnify those overly-aggressive-faxers under advertising injury provisions.

Diversity actions force federal courts to beef up on state laws. This week, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals got a crash course in Minnesota insurance law, thanks to a homeowner's insurance dispute.

Joseph and Carolyn Friedberg sought coverage from their insurer, Chubb & Son Inc. (Chubb), for damage sustained to their home. After Chubb denied their claim, the Friedbergs sued for declaratory relief. The district court granted Chubb's motion for summary judgment, and the Friedbergs appealed.

What's in a name?

That which we call a "trademark" will not -- in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals -- be automatically deemed a "title or slogan."

When we're talking about an insurer's duty to defend, the distinction is critical.

Possession may be nine-tenths of the law, but it’s unnecessary for a bank in Minnesota to possess a promissory note when it commences foreclosure.

Kenath Stein challenged the validity of both the foreclosure of his home by Chase Home Finance (Chase), and the redemption of his home by National City Bank (National), a junior lienholder. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the banks this week.

The NBA season is in jeopardy, and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals is to blame.

After weeks of union decertification talk, NBA players took action this week. On Monday, negotiations between players and owners ended, and the National Basketball Players Association (NBPA) voted to disband.

As members of the NBPA - a union - players were stuck in the collective bargaining process. Now that the players have elected to disband the NBPA, they can pursue an antitrust lawsuit against the NBA owners.

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this week that Travelers Casualty and Surety Company did not have to cover Tactical Stop-Loss's losses stemming from a major shareholder's criminal scheme.

Tactical Stop-Loss and an affiliate (the Tactical Group) administer trust accounts for insurance companies that provide stop-loss coverage to employee benefit-plan sponsors. Tactical Group purchased a Crime Policy (Policy) from Travelers Casualty and Surety Company insuring against loss from theft or forgery by an employee "acting alone or in collusion with other persons."