You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Xerox Corp. v. Print & Mail by Morrell, Inc.

Citations: 13 F. Supp. 3d 265; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41348; 2014 WL 1279724Docket: No. 12-CV-6404L

Court: District Court, W.D. New York; March 27, 2014; Federal District Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this legal dispute, Xerox Corporation filed a lawsuit against Print Mail by Morrell, Inc. and its owner, alleging breach of contract and conversion concerning two finance lease agreements for printing equipment. Xerox sought monetary compensation for unpaid amounts under the leases and for the breach of a guaranty agreement signed by the individual defendant. The defendants contested the claims and filed a counterclaim for tortious interference with contract. However, after their legal counsel withdrew, they failed to secure new representation or respond to Xerox's subsequent motion for summary judgment. The court, upon reviewing the undisputed evidence, granted summary judgment in favor of Xerox, citing the defendants' default on the lease agreements and the guaranty. The judgment awarded Xerox a total of $366,376.64, which included unpaid lease amounts, prejudgment interest, costs, and attorneys' fees. Additionally, the court dismissed the defendants' counterclaim due to lack of prosecution as they ceased participation in the proceedings. The decision underscores the importance of addressing motions for summary judgment, as well as the consequences of failing to prosecute claims. The judgment was finalized with the dismissal of the defendants' counterclaims and the awarding of damages to Xerox.

Legal Issues Addressed

Breach of Contract under Lease Agreements

Application: Xerox demonstrated that the defendants defaulted on payments under both lease agreements, establishing a prima facie case of breach of contract.

Reasoning: The court found that P. M had defaulted on payments under both lease agreements, with significant unpaid amounts totaling $302,528.13.

Calculation of Damages

Application: The court awarded damages to Xerox, which were mathematically computable based on the lease agreements and supported by business records.

Reasoning: The damages sought by Xerox are substantiated by business records and sworn testimony, and no factual disputes regarding those damages have arisen.

Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute

Application: The defendants' counterclaim was dismissed due to their non-participation after their attorney withdrew, demonstrating a failure to prosecute.

Reasoning: The Court notes that the defendants’ counterclaim may also be dismissed due to their failure to prosecute, as they have not participated in the proceedings since their counsel withdrew on June 27, 2013.

Enforcement of Guaranty Agreement

Application: The court held Morrell personally liable for the breach of the guaranty agreement, as he failed to make any payments on behalf of P. M.

Reasoning: Xerox seeks a monetary judgment for unpaid amounts due under the leases and for the conversion of the leased equipment, as well as for Morrell's personal breach of a guaranty agreement that he signed.

Summary Judgment under Rule 56(c)

Application: The court granted summary judgment to Xerox since there was no genuine issue of material fact and the defendants failed to oppose the motion.

Reasoning: The motion for summary judgment was granted in favor of Xerox.