Pennsylvania Breach Of Contract Legal Questions

Unless the contract contained an out - like "this contract will be valid for 5 years from date", or "this contract will no longer be valid if the quoted price is less than 5% over the mortuary's cost to purchase", or something similar, it should still be valid.  However, after so many years, is the entity with which your grandmother signed the contract still around?  For example, if your grandmother signed a contract with x corp. in 1999, and in 2006 x corp. sold its assets to y corp., and went out of business, the contract is legally valid but practically unenforceable, because x corp. is no longer around to perform it or to pay damages for its breach.... Read More

If the buyer just bought the assets of the business, rather than the equity (e.g. stock in the corporation that operated the business), it is not (except under rare circumstances) liable on obligations it did not agree to assume.  Just because the contract could have been assigned legally does not mean that it was assigned.  The original owner remains obligated on the contract.  Depending on the actual facts, it is possible that the buyer induced the seller to breach its contract with you and is therefore liable for tortious interference with contract (for example, when a competitor of your old employer, knowing that you are bound by a non-compete provision in your current employment agreement, hires you to work for its competing business, it may be liable for tortious interference with contract.)... Read More

Assuming that the contract does not limit the remedies available to the non-breaching party, you would sue the recipient for breach of contract, seeking a number of different or alternative remedies.  For example, you can seek to recover money damages caused by the breach.  You may be able to have a constructive trust imposed over the proceeds of the recipient's relationship with the customer.  You may also seek an injunction against the recipient continuing to deal with the customer and/or competing with you, and possibly a preliminary injunction to prevent the recipient from continuing his deal with the customer during the pendency of the litigation (it will be difficult to win a motion for a preliminary injunction.)... Read More

Yes, you can sue her.  Assuming you had a valid lease agreement which did not give the landlord the option to back out if she sold the place, the landlord had no right to rescind it, and you've suffered damages (the extra storage and interest on the delayed repayment; you cannot recover for your inconvenience) due to her breach.... Read More

In some states there is a period of time within which you can back out (often 3 days).  After that, assuming you had no valid reason to back out (e.g. the other side had breached a material term, or defrauded you into entering into the contract, etc.) you would be in breach of contract.  The buyer would likely sue you for specific performance (i.e. to have the Court compel you to perform the contract) and/or any damages he/she/it sustained from the breach.  The realtor would also sue you for the commissions he/she/it lost from the sale.... Read More

If they have only a claim, which has not yet been reduced to judgment, the company probably can't pursue him for 20  years.  Without knowing more about the facts of the case, I can't know what state's law would apply, but the statute of limitations on breach of contract is six years from the breach in New York and four years, I believe, in Pennsylvania.  Sometimes a statute of limitations can be extended, but there is nothing in your email which suggests that this one would be in this case. If, however, the company obtained a judgment previously, it has 20 years in New York (not sure of the limitations period in Pennsylvania) to collect on that judgment.  Thus, if the company sued your husband previously and obtained a judgment, it can probably still seek to collect on it.  Even if the judgment was entered on default, that is that your husband did not appear to contest it, it would still be valid unless your husband can show that the Court which entered the judgment did not have jurisdiction over him, either because he was not properly served with the summons and complaint in the lawsuit or because he had no contacts with that state and so could not be sued there.... Read More

Your former employer can sue you, but that doesn't mean that he/she/it will win.  Many restrictive covenants are not enforceable, depending on such factors as the type of industry involved, the type of services the employee provides, how wide an area the covenant covers, how long a time period is affected, whether the covenant prohibits all competition or has a lesser restriction (i.e. can't solicit former employer's customers, can't work with customers you've worked with in the past year on behalf of the former employer, etc.); whether the employer received separate consideration (beyond just getting or keeping their job) for agreeing to the covenant, whether the employer invested time and money training the employee, whether the employee left voluntarily or was fired, whether the employee had access to any trade secrets of the former employer, etc.... Read More

There may be other reasons why you can't put a for sale sign up, like zoning regulations, but  unless your lease says you can't do it, the fact that you have tenants is not an obstacle.  However, until and unless you either agree with your tenants to terminate their lease, or go through the court process to terminate the lease, you can only sell the house subject to the lease.  In other words, someone can buy the house, but they would still have to honor the lease.  If you represent to the buyer that you have full unencumbered title to the house, you may be committing fraud.... Read More

Unfortunately, because the contract was breached so long ago, in 2005, the statute of limitations on the claim of your husband's estate (not you personally) for repayment of the loan has probably run.  Such limitations period can sometimes be extended under certain circumstances, including the death of the obligee, and the fact that the wrongdoer was a fiduciary (you may have an argument that your husband's cousin owed him a fiduciary obligation as a close family member, but I think the argument is very weak), but your email doesn't indicate any basis for extending the statute (I believe it is four years in Pennsylvania) up to the present day.  If your husband's cousin had reaffirmed her obligation in writing, that might extend the limitations period, but you indicated that you had no writing in which she had done so. Your husband's estate probably has a claim against the cousin for the value of your husband's possessions which were lost due to her neglect.  However, in light of the fact that she just lost the property to foreclosure, there is a reasonable chance that she doesn't have the money to pay for the loss even if you should sue her and obtain a judgment.... Read More

The general answer to your question is yes, but in your particular example probably no. Complaints usually have numerous causes of action in them, all based on pretty much the same set of facts.  Thus, for example, if you claim that your lawyer has misappropriated some settlement money that he/she should have disbursed to you. you would allege claims sounding in conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, malpractice, breach of contract, and anything else you could think of which might fit.  It is entirely possible that some of these claims will be dismissed because the statute of limitations on them has run, while others will survive because there are longer statutes of limitations for those claims. However, in the particular malpractice area, the statute of limitations is probably uniform, whether the claim is based on tort or contract.  I say this because, although I am not sure about Pennsylvania law, in New York there used to be a different statute of limitations for malpractice depending on whether the underlying claim was based on breach of contract or tort, but that law was changed so that the same limitations period now applies in either situation. Incidentally, there is a "continuing representation" exception to the limitations period in NY malpractice cases, and I'm pretty sure in PA as well.  The statute of limitations does not begin to run while your attorney continues to represent you.  Thus, let's say that the attorney files a complaint too late and it is dismissed.  The statute of limitions doesn't start when he/she first screws up, i.e. when the deadline for filing the complaint passed, but rather when he/she stops representing you in the case.  Thus, let's say the deadline for filing is 1/1/10, the lawyer doesn't file until 2/1/10, the case is dismissed because it was filed too late on 5/1/10, the case is appealed and a decision affirming the dismissal is issued on 2/1/11, the lawyer writes a letter to the client on 2/5/11 explaining that the appeal has been lost but that there are still options, and the client fires the lawyer on 2/15/11.  The limitations period would not begin to run until 2/15/11. ... Read More

Your contract is not as clear as it could be, but I don't think it matters because a  provision which requires him to pay for attorneys' fees from start to finish due to a subsequent breach would be, in my view, a penalty and thus unenforceable.  I believe the clause requires the breaching party to pay all reasonable attorneys' fees (the word "reasonable" will be implied as a matter of law) incurred by the non-breaching party in seeking to enforce the agreement.... Read More

The first question in such a situation is what does the Agreement of Sale state?  The typical Pennsylvania form provides for options including liquidated damages, actual damages and specific performance.  Depending on your buyer's financial situation, the real question may be whether they can obtain the financing the purchase the property.  If they cannot, your options are likely reduced to the first two mentioned.  It is important to note that mediation or arbitration may be required before pursuing those remedies.... Read More

Did you pay the agent any money during this time period?  Can you prove that, if the agent had listed the property correctly, you would have sold it sooner?  Did you pay any additional money during the extra period when you were carrying the house which you did not get back (I'm thinking of extra mortgage payments, which you got back when you sold the house because the amount of the mortgage you had to pay off had been reduced).  If so, you may be able to recover some damages for the money you paid, and/or for your extra costs in carrying the property for the extra time, but it will not be easy to prove that the house would have sold sooner if listed properly, and the amount of money is probably not a lot.  You might be able to recover more if you can prove that you would have been able to sell at a higher price if the house was listed earlier, but, even if you believe that to be the case, it will be very difficult to prove. ... Read More

As with most landlord/tenant issues, the content of the lease, assuming there is one, is crucial to answer your question.  Typically, "if" you are a named tenant, you remain responsible to the landlord for the rent during the term of the lease whether or not you are still living there.  Depending on the term of the lease (month-to-month, year-to-year, etc.), you may be able to teminate the lease and end your obligations.... Read More

You have described the relationship with your family member as a typical landlord/tenant relationship.  The remedies available to you are generally found within the written lease as well as the Landlord Tenant Act.  Typically, you are able to sue for possession and/or unpaid rent at the magisterial district judge in which the residence being rented is situated, and, if successful, a judgment will be entered.  If that judgment is not appeal, a judgment may be finalized.  Although garnishment is not generally permitted in Pennsylvania, it is allowed for landlord/tenant disputes.... Read More

You refer to your payment to your former employer as an investment, but with a pure investment, the investor takes the risk of a loss - if your Apple stock goes down, it's your bad luck.  What you describe sounds more like a loan, or a hybrid of the two.  If you loaned your former employer money which he has failed to repay on time, you can certainly sue him for breach of the contract.  However, unless the contract specifically provides for an award of attorneys' fees, or you are able to bring your case within the parameters of some statute which provides for attorneys' fees (unlikely), you will have to bear your own costs, although, if you win, you will probably be awarded interest.  Unfortunately, from the circumstances you describe, it seems very possible that your former employer does not have the money to pay you, and that you will not be able to collect even if you obtain a judgment.  Thus, you should be careful about spending too much on an attorney unless you are sure that the defendant has the means to satisfy any judgment.  You may want to consider handling the matter yourself, or hiring an attorney who will handle the matter on a contingency basis, so that you don't have to pay anything if you don't collect.  Another option may be to file an involuntary bankruptcy action against your former employer, where the court would supervise the distribution of his assets to his creditors.  However, depending on the number of creditors he has and other factors which I have no way of  knowing about, this may not be possible. Also, although you write about your former employer as "he", in many cases the employer is "it", i.e. a corporation, llc, or some other legal entity.  Even though "he" may own the entity, "he" may not be personally liable for its obligations.  In other words, if you loaned money to a corporation, and the corporation has no money, you may not be able to collect even if the owner of the corporation does have money to pay you.... Read More

Assuming that this is a valid copyright, and that you created the process for your former employer, and did not have an agreement by which you owned all or part of that intellectual property, it belongs to your former employer.  You cannot use your former employer's intellectual property (whether it be a copyright, patent, trademark, or some other form) for your new employer without your former employer's permission.... Read More