Judge Orders Pa. Company to Honor $4M Pledge to Bible College
After failing to meet a filing deadline in a federal breach of contract case, a Pennsylvania company has been ordered to honor its $4 million pledge to a West Virginia Bible college.
April 18, 2018 at 05:01 PM
4 minute read
After failing to meet a filing deadline in a federal breach of contract case, a Pennsylvania company has been ordered to honor its $4 million pledge to a West Virginia Bible college.
U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III of the Middle District of Pennsylvania granted summary judgment in favor of the Appalachian Bible College and ordered defendant Foremost Industries to make the donation it promised in a gift agreement with the school.
Foremost agreed to make five payments of $800,000 to the school, but failed to do so by the time the first two payments were due. The school, referred to as ABC by the court, filed a breach of contract lawsuit in 2016.
The now-shuttered Greencastle-based company—which was bought out by GLD Foremost Holdings—removed the case to Pennsylvania federal court, where ABC filed an amended complaint including a claim of anticipatory breach of contract. The court imposed filing deadlines for motions, but was concerned that Foremost was trying to stymie the litigation.
“On March 16, 2018, the court ordered Foremost Industries to file an opposition brief no later than April 16, 2018, due to concerns that Foremost Industries was engaging in dilatory tactics by repeatedly seeking leave to obtain new counsel,” Jones wrote in his opinion. “Despite the clear language of our order, and our warning that failure to file an opposition brief would result in our considering the motion as unopposed, Foremost Industries has not filed its brief in time.”
To prove anticipatory breach of contract, a plaintiff must show that the breaching party has displayed “an absolute and unequivocal refusal to perform or a distinct and positive statement of an inability to do so,” according to the 2010 Commonwealth Court ruling in Boro Construction v. Ridley School District.
That is in addition to the standard breach of contract factors, which include demonstrating “(1) the existence of a contract, including its essential terms, (2) a breach of the contract; and, (3) resulting damages,” according to the 2016 state Supreme Court case Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck v. Law Firm of Malone Middleman.
“The existence of the gift agreement in this case is undisputed. The gift agreement contains all the essential terms and indicates the parties' intent to be legally bound and to legally bind successor entities,” Jones said, satisfying the first element.
“The second element requires a breach of a duty imposed by the contract. In this case, the contract imposed a duty on Foremost Industries to pay $800,000 per year from April 1, 2016, through April 1, 2020. In its answer, Foremost Industries admits that it did not pay ABC the $800,000 due on April 1, 2016, and that it did not intend to make any future payments to ABC under the gift agreement,” Jones said. “Thus, according to Foremost Industries' own admissions, the second element has been satisfied. The final element, resultant damages, is also easily satisfied. By the plain terms of the gift agreement, Foremost Industries was obligated to pay ABC $800,000 per year beginning April 1, 2016, and continuing for five years,” which it did not.
“ABC has not seen a single penny of that pledge, which Foremost Industries freely admits,” Jones said.
According to the docket, Foremost is not currently represented by counsel. Jeffrey T. McGuire of Pion, Nerone, Girman, Winslow & Smith in Harrisburg represented Foremost most recently and did not respond to a request for comment.
ABC is represented by James R. Hartline of Davies, McFarland & Carroll in Pittsburgh and did not respond to a request for comment.
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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllImmunity for Mental Health Care and Coverage for CBD: What's on the Pa. High Court's November Calendar
5 minute readSlip-and-Fall Suit Cleared to Proceed Against Kalahari Indoor Waterpark
3 minute readVolunteering for Voter Protection Efforts, Pa. Firms Brace for Contentious Election
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Ex-CFO of San Francisco Law Firms Pleads Guilty to $1.3M Embezzlement Scheme, DOJ Announces
- 2What Does Ohio Supreme Court's Opioid Decision Mean for Public Nuisance Claims?
- 3Bucking Industry Trend, Sidley Austin Elects Biggest Class of Partners in Firm History
- 4US Judge Throws Out Sale of Infowars to The Onion. But That's Not the End of the Road for Sandy Hook Families
- 5‘Really Deflating’: Judges React to Biden Threat to Veto New Judgeships Bill
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250