Facts

TransMart Inc. filed suit against San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) in relation to a contract that gave TransMart lease rights to bring retail brands to 43 BART stations in the San Francisco Bay Area.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: TransMart contended that BART breached the terms of the parties' agreement and interfered with its performance of the contract such that it missed a deadline to open nine retail stores by August 2016. TransMart alleged that BART's interference, which caused it to miss the deadline, resulted in it suffering losses of tens of millions of dollars. Specifically, TransMart argued that BART delayed responding to its proposals and intentionally made their interactions overly complicated such that the contract would lapse.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: BART denied the allegations and contended that subtenants' designs simply were not satisfactory.

BART cross-claimed for breach of contract, alleging TransMart did not restore BART's property to its original conditions.

Result

The jury returned a verdict in BART's favor on TransMart's claims. The jury found that TransMart did not meet its own obligations under the agreement and was not excused from performance. Additionally, the jury concluded TransMart did not fail to restore BART property to its former condition.