On July 30, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California issued a decision concerning the scope and interpretation of an agreement that required software maintenance. Specifically, the dispute, which included claims for declaratory relief, breach of contract, and various torts, centered around an alleged intra-corporate conspiracy to deprive plaintiff software maintenance services for imaging technology. As analyzed in greater detail in this column, the court issued rulings in both parties’ favor and ultimately did not completely grant defendants’ motion to dismiss. See Vascular Imaging Prof’l v. Digirad, No. 19cv486 JM(MSG), 2019 WL 3429178 (S.D. Cal. July 30, 2019).
Facts and Procedural History
Plaintiff Vascular Imaging Professionals (Vascular) provides a “mobile nuclear imaging service,” which requires the use of sophisticated cameras and related equipment procured from third-parties. Defendants are Digirad Corporation (Digirad Corp.) and Digirad Imaging Solutions, Inc. (Digirad Imaging, and together, Defendants). Defendants were part of the same corporate structure.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]