Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
WORLDWIDE SUBSIDY GROUP, LLC, a Texas Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WORLDWIDE PANTS INCORPORATED, a California corporation and Does, 1-10, inclusive, Defendants-Appellees.
MEMORANDUM ***
Worldwide Subsidy Group (WSG) appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of Worldwide Pants Inc. (WPI) and denying its motion to strike. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
1. The district court did not err by ruling WSG's breach of contract claims arising from the 2002 written agreement were time-barred. California's four-year statute of limitations for written agreements “accrues at the time of the breach.” Reichert v. Gen. Ins. Co. of Am., 68 Cal.2d 822, 69 Cal.Rptr. 321, 442 P.2d 377 (1968). Assuming WSG maintained post-term collection rights under the 2002 written agreement, WPI put WSG on notice in December 2003 that it had no intention to honor said rights when WPI and WSG mutually agreed to terminate the 2002 agreement. Accordingly, the statute of limitations ran on WSG's claims in December 2007, making its 2014 complaint untimely.
2. The district court did not err by ruling WSG's claims arising from the alleged 2007 oral contract were time-barred. In California, the statute of limitations for oral contracts is two years, and is triggered on the date of the alleged breach. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 339. If an oral contract existed, WPI breached it in March 2007 when WPI issued a declaration expressly revoking WSG's authorization to collect royalties on its behalf. WSG received notice of this revocation by at least May of that year.
3. The district court did not err by denying WSG's motion to strike. WSG filed a Rule 12(f) motion to strike which is inapplicable to a motion for summary judgment.
AFFIRMED.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-55353
Decided: July 09, 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)