The issue of whether plaintiff's predecessor was unable to continue to market the product manufactured by defendant due to defendant's material breach of the Supply Agreement, and was therefore entitled to return of the advance fee as provided in the related License Agreement, was not necessary to the determinations in the prior arbitration proceeding that defendant had materially breached the Supply Agreement but that plaintiff's predecessor was not entitled to damages thereunder...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
