Re: digEcor ruling and a general litigation principle...trillium
in response to
by
posted on
Sep 11, 2009 09:41PM
trillium,
The judge had already ordered that EDIG owes digEcor the purchase price of the batteries ($80K) which EDIG has never contested and saved the money to refund digEcor. In today's verdict, the judge however did not award consequential damages to digEcor for the failure to deliver them. From Doc 324, page 19 dated 13 Mar 2009:
"A judgment that digEcor is entitled to the purchase price of the batteries is also appropriate. To the extent that digEcor also seeks consequential damages on for failure to deliver the batteries, that claim presents a factual issue that, on this record, cannot be decided on summary judgment."