Case Law Summaries

Kulick v. Spa Lady

CONTRACTS; DAMAGES—The right to impose a ten percent annual price increase is not the right to wait five years and then impose a fifty percent price increase but damages should be measured by looking not at the excess charges but at the cost of replacement services.

• Opinion Date: February 10, 2003
• Business Law

Cumberland County Improvement Authority v. GSP Recycling Co., Inc.

CONTRACTS; DAMAGES—A contract will be interpreted to provide for remedies upon default even if there are no such specific provisions.

• Opinion Date: March 12, 2003
• Business Law

20/20 Solutions, Inc. v. Dubrow Management Corp.

CONTRACTS; DAMAGES—Where a spelling error on a printing job is inconsequential and the customer has proofread the copy before printing, the printer has no liability.

• Opinion Date: June 4, 2003
• Business Law

Buterick v. Vazzano

CONTRACTS; DAMAGES—Reprehensibility of conduct is a factor to be used in setting damages under New Jersey’s Punitive Damage Act.

• Opinion Date: September 24, 2003
• Business Law

Healthcare Services Group, Inc. v. Royal Healthcare of Middlesex, LLC

CONTRACTS; AGENCY—Even though an agreement between a customer and a contractor may disclaim a contractual relationship between them with the intention that the customer be insulated from the debts its contractor incurs in the course of performance, if the agreement actually or impliedly makes the contractor an agent of the customer, the customer may be liable for those debts under agency principles.

• Opinion Date: August 13, 2003
• Business Law

Tender Loving Care Ambulance & Ambulette Co., Inc. v. Meridian Hospitals Corporation

CONTRACTS—Where the terms of a contract extension agreement are unclear, courts will compare it to the original underlying agreement to determine what the parties may have intended in their extension agreement.

• Opinion Date: May 15, 2003
• Business Law

Grantuskas v. Caruana

CONTRACTS—Parties need not agree to specific provisions within their agreements if they have agreed that a third party would make the final decision as to how the missing provision should read.

• Opinion Date: December 1, 2003
• Business Law

Rosenberg v. Cherry Hill Porsche

CONSUMER FRAUD; WARRANTIES—It is not fraud for a vehicle manufacturer to repair damage to a new vehicle after the vehicle leaves the factory when the warranty material furnished to a buyer says that such repairs may be made in accordance with the manufacturer’s standards.

• Opinion Date: December 16, 2003
• Business Law

Zorba Contractors, Inc. v. Housing Authority of The City of Newark

CONSUMER FRAUD; JURIES—Jury trials are available in Consumer Fraud Act actions.

• Opinion Date: July 11, 2003
• Business Law

Tanksley v. Cook

CONSUMER FRAUD; ATTORNEYS FEES—An award of attorneys fees under the Consumer Fraud Act can include an award for fees and costs incurred in collecting the judgment.

• Opinion Date: May 2, 2003
• Business Law