JEFFERSON CITY – A New York company was granted summary judgment of more than $100,000 against a Kansas City company in a breach of contract suit.
U.S. District Judge Nanette K. Laughrey, on the bench of the U.S. District Court of the Western District of Missouri, issued an nine-page order Aug. 13 in the lawsuit by Qwasi Inc. alleging claims of breach of contract against defendant Advatext LLC, doing business as AvidMobile. Qwasi’s motion for summary judgment on its claim of breach of contract was granted and summary judgment was entered against AvidMobile in the amount of $127,464.12.
Qwasi is a New York-based software company and AvidMobile is a Kansas City-based software company.
According to the complaint, the two parties established an eight-year business relationship beginning in 2010.
“Qwasi agreed to design and host an application for AvidMobile, and to provide short code services, the enterprise mobile marketing center and API services. In return, AvidMobile agreed to submit monthly payments to Qwasi based upon a predetermined fee schedule,” the ruling states.
AvidMobile allegedly failed to comply with its predetermined payment schedule. Qwasi alleged it was paid a total amount of $33,067.76, but did not receive the remaining balance before it terminated the services.
The court determined the existence of the contract and the breach of a contractual duty are undisputed.
However, AvidMobile maintained that, “genuine issues of material fact regarding damages, and several affirmative defenses preclude summary judgment in Qwasi’s favor.”
According to the court document, three of its affirmative defenses include: breach of contract excusing further performance, set off, and failure of consideration.
The court determined, “This dispute is immaterial. Qwasi seeks only the total outstanding balance on the invoices submitted to AvidMobile. It does not assert that it is entitled to any interest or fees related to AvidMobile’s failure to pay on time, and thus the total amount that remains on AvidMobile’s outstanding balance is unaffected by the specific invoice to which each payment is applied.”
Regarding the first defense, AvidMobile alleged Qwasi materially breached the contract first by delaying in resolving technical issues.
"There is no evidence that AvidMobile suffered any damages as a result of Qwasi’s alleged breach,” and so “there is no evidence that a jury could rely on to even try to determine whether Qwasi’s breach was material,” the court ruled.
Regarding the second defense, the court stated “there is no evidence that AvidMobile suffered any damages as a result of Qwasi’s alleged breach of contract,” and therefore AvidMobile is not entitled to a setoff.
Regarding the third defense, AvidMobile based its defense on the same “defective services” as the first defense. The court determined Qwasi’s contract with AvidMobile only includes its obligation of providing technical support to address any issues with the services, but does not warrant the length of time that the issues would be resolved.