Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partner Joseph Salvo and Senior Counsel John Mills prevailed on a summary judgment motion in a breach of contract dispute brought against the firm’s clients, a property management company and construction management company.
In the dispute, the plaintiffs, the Board of a condominium building in New York City suing on its behalf and on behalf of the condominium owners, alleged that the firm’s clients breached their respective contractual obligations. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the firm’s clients failed to act reasonably and inform and instruct the Board to investigate and identify an appropriate remediation plan for certain original construction defects identified throughout the condominium building. The plaintiffs sought $12,500,000 in damages against the firm’s clients.
After over six years of litigation, including hundreds of thousands of pages of document discovery and twelve depositions, the team filed their summary judgment motion, arguing that at all relevant times, the firm’s clients complied with all contractual obligations to the plaintiffs. The motion argued that even assuming the firm’s clients breached any contractual provisions, any alleged breach was not the proximate cause of the plaintiffs’ alleged damages. Instead, the plaintiffs’ alleged damages were caused by the original defective building construction, which the firm’s clients had no involvement.
The court granted the motion in its entirety. The court agreed with the team’s argument that the plaintiffs failed to identify breaches of any provision of agreements, and that the alleged breaches were beyond the scope of the agreements. The court also rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the firm’s clients breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, holding that any such determination would be inconsistent with the agreements’ terms.
Just as the team had argued during several years of litigation, the court held that both the property management company and construction management company were required to act at the direction and recommendation of the Board, and did so, fully complying with all contractual obligations. Even further, the court agreed with the team’s argument that any alleged breach of the contracts was not a proximate cause of the plaintiffs’ damages.
As a result, the court dismissed both of the remaining causes of action against the firm’s clients in their entirety. The clients and the Gordon & Rees team were thrilled with this hard-fought victory in this years-long dispute.