Attorneys Jeffrey Adler and Michael Malin obtained a complete dismissal of contract and related tort claims on behalf of warehouse logistics software company.
Plaintiff, a warehouse logistics hardware company, hired the client, a warehouse logistic software company, to develop a software system for a major California produce packaging company to run its highly automated warehouse. A dispute arose after the produce packing company changed the specs and then expressed dissatisfaction with elements of the installed integrated software and hardware system. Plaintiff initially filed suit in California but then agreed to re-file the suit in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania based upon a forum selection clause in the contract. When the Plaintiff re-filed the suit, Plaintiff failed to attach the applicable contract to the Complaint, citing confidentiality. Malin and Adler moved to dismiss under FRCP 12(b)(6) citing the specific contractual language providing for a one-year statute of limitations and also based upon the “Gist of the Action Doctrine” which bars tort claims founded upon contractual obligations. The motion attached the relevant contract sections which Plaintiff had failed to provide to the Court. The motion noted that Pennsylvania law specifically permits the reduction of the contract statute of limitation to one year and included a careful analysis of all possible dates when the one-year limitations period would have run.
As part of its response, Plaintiff moved to transfer the case it chose to file in the EDPA back to California citing another pending case against the California produce packaging company. Plaintiff also made a convoluted argument on the statute of limitations based upon an argument that the contract was never “accepted.”
Judge John F. Murphy denied Plaintiff’s motion to transfer and granted the motion to dismiss in its entirety, accepting all of the defense’s arguments and dismissing the case with prejudice. Judge Murphy found that “Because the causes of action sounding in contract are barred by a [contractual] one-year limitation provision, and the tort claims are repackaged contract claims, we grant the motion and dismiss the case with prejudice.”