Facts

In 2006, plaintiff Wilshire Radiology MRI Inc. and defendant Masterplan entered into a contract to install an MRI machine at Wilshire's facility. Masterplan was a medical device repair company. Wilshire filed suit against Masterplan, Magnetic Resonance Technologies Inc., Valley Access Medical Imaging and Valley Radiology Inc., alleging breach of contract, negligence and negligent misrepresentation. All other defendants besides Masterplan settled or were dismissed from the action. Masterplan filed a counterclaim, alleging breach of contract, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and quantum meruit.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Wilshire alleged that Masterplan stated the job would last three weeks at the cost of approximately $86,000. Wilshire claimed that in January 2008, Masterplan was fired after the installation was not finished, after being unable to make progress after spending months on the job. Wilshire hired another company to complete installation. Wilshire further contended that Masterplan had stated the MRI machine wouldn't work and offered to sell Wilshire a new machine.

Wilshire alleged that Masterplan presented fake invoices and demanded payments for parts and labor it claimed was outside the scope of the contract. Wilshire also contended that Masterplan was not equipped to install the model of MRI machine it had purchased. Wilshire claimed that Masterplan had sent two technicians on three occasions to inspect the machine before beginning installation work.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Masterplan disputed all of Wilshire's allegations and contended that, with Wilshire's knowledge, it had not worked on the MRI machine since August. Further, Masterplan contended that the delays that occurred were the fault of Wilshire when it failed to pay the installments when they were due and because the MRI had hardware problems that were out of Masterplan's control.

Masterplan alleged that Wilshire had not disclosed certain information about the MRI machine before the installation began, and that subsequently Masterplan learned that the MRI never performed scans in the configuration it was in. Masterplan claimed that the MRI's original magnet had been replaced with a non-standard magnet, preventing the manufacturer from providing support for the MRI system, and that the MRI was susceptible to multiple mechanical and electronic parts failures. Masterplan contended that had it known this information, it would not have taken the job.

Masterplan further alleged that it could get the MRI to create scan images, but Wilshire refused to pay for parts needed to enable the machine to scan without any artifact.

Damages

According to plaintiff's counsel: Wilshire sought $1 million in lost profits as well as $10,700 in incidental expenses. According to defense counsel: Wilshire sought $1.5 million in lost profits and over $100,000 in incidental expenses.

Result

The jury rendered a unanimous verdict in favor of Wilshire, awarding it $510,700.

Deliberation

two to four hours

Length

two weeks