This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Insurance
Breach of Contract
Unfair Competition

Unical Enterprises, Inc. v. The American Insurance Company, Stoner & Company

Published: Mar. 3, 2007 | Result Date: Oct. 16, 2006 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 05-3511 Settlement –  $25,000

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Thomas J. Weiss
(Law Offices of Thomas J. Weiss)


Defendant

Asim K. Desai
(Gordon & Rees LLP)

Charles G. Kabele

Craig R. Breitman
( Selman Breitman LLP)


Facts

In September 2004, a sprinkler malfunctioned at a warehouse owned by plaintiff Unical Enterprises Inc. As a result, the warehouse's inventory of cordless phones suffered water damage. Plaintiff had an insurance policy with defendant American Insurance Co. Defendant paid the claim. It then hired defendant Stoner & Co. to discard the damaged items. However, defendant Stoner sold the inventory.

Plaintiff thereafter sued defendants, claiming breach of contract. It also alleged negligence, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligent interference with economic relations, unfair competition, and breach of fiduciary duty. Defendant American moved to dismiss the claims, which was granted.

Plaintiff then filed an amended complaint for negligence only against defendant Stoner, and a breach of contract claim only against defendant American. It alleged negligent interference with economic relations and unfair competition against both defendants.

Stoner then filed a Third Party Complaint against American, which was also dismissed.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The policy with defendant American forbid the sale of salvaged goods in the retail market. By doing so, defendants engaged in unfair competition.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Because plaintiff only sold new items, there was no competition between the salvaged items and plaintiff's products. Further, the goods defendant sold were deemed outdated technology. Moreover, plaintiff could not prove its assertion that warranty labeled items were sold.

Damages

Plaintiff sought $2,000,000 in loss of goodwill and reputation, $950,000 in lost sales, in addition to punitive damages and attorney fees.

Result

The court granted defendant American's motion to dismiss. The case against defendant Stoner went forward. The parties eventually settled for $25,000.


#83884

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390