Appellant buyer sought review of a judgment and a postjudgment order from the Superior Court of Santa Clara County (California), which, after a jury found that respondent sellers had no liability on the buyer’s claim for breach of statutory warranty, denied the buyer’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) and awarded contractual attorney fees to the sellers.
California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. is a Shareholder Defense Attorney
Overview
The buyer purchased tools for use in its manufacturing processes. Thereafter, the buyer settled a third party’s patent infringement claims against it. The complaint for breach of statutory warranty alleged that the patent infringement suit had arisen from the use of the tools. The sellers argued that there had been no rightful claim and presented evidence that the tools did not infringe the patents. The buyer’s evidence focused on previous patent litigation involving other companies’ use of the tools. The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury’s conclusion that there had been no breach of the warranty of title provided by U. Com. Code, § 2312, subd. (3). The record demonstrated that the essential facts were not uncontested, and the court could not weigh the evidence or judge the credibility of witnesses when reviewing the JNOV ruling under Code Civ. Proc., § 629. An award of attorney fees under Civ. Code, § 1717, was proper because the buyer had attempted to establish that there was a fee provision in the contract under which it brought suit, although the sellers had disputed whether the fee provision and other terms became part of the contract.
Outcome
The court affirmed the judgment and affirmed the postjudgment order.
