ST. LOUIS — In a recent decision, the Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District ruled on a long-standing dispute between Charter Communications and Mobile National Development Co. regarding an exclusive cable service agreement.
Mobile National Development Co. is the owner of Eldorado Estates mobile home park in St. Peters.
The court partially reversed a lower court's decision to void the entire contract based on a 2007 FCC ruling that prohibits exclusivity clauses in contracts between cable companies and multiple-dwelling units like mobile home parks, according to an opinion filed Oct. 29 in Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District.
"We affirm in part and reverse in part," Presiding Judge James M. Dowd wrote in the opinion. "We affirm with respect to points one and three. As to point two, we reverse the judgment to the extent the trial court voided the parties' entire 2003 contract. Instead, we order stricken the entire addendum and the words "or compete" from section 5(c) of the 2003 agreement leaving the remainder intact."
The conflict arose from a 2003 contract in which Mobile National granted Charter an exclusive easement to install and maintain cable services at Eldorado Estates, in exchange for a share of Charter's revenue—27.4% from cable TV and 7.5% from internet services.
Charter abided by this agreement until 2020, when it announced it would no longer honor the contract, citing the FCC’s 2007 ban on exclusivity clauses as its justification, the opinion states.
Mobile sued Charter in December 2020, claiming breach of contract and seeking to enforce continued payments, according to the opinion.
Charter countered by requesting the contract’s cancellation and refund of payments made since the FCC order, the opinion states.
The trial court ruled in Charter's favor in December 2023, voiding the 2003 contract entirely and rejecting Mobile’s claims under an older, related 1990 contract, which the court deemed obsolete.
On appeal, Mobile argued that the FCC’s ban on exclusivity clauses did not necessitate voiding the entire contract but only specific provisions.
It proposed removing the words "or compete" from a key section of the contract and the word “exclusive” from the addendum, which outlines the revenue-sharing terms.
The appeals court partially agreed with Mobile. The judges concluded that while the FCC order invalidated Charter's exclusive access rights, it did not require nullifying the entire contract.
Instead, the court ordered the removal of the words "or compete" from the contract's exclusivity clause and the entire addendum, which detailed Mobile’s compensation based on exclusivity, the opinion states.
The ruling allows the rest of the contract to stand, granting Charter non-exclusive rights to offer services at Eldorado.
The court further upheld the trial court's rejection of Mobile’s claim under the 1990 agreement, stating that the 2003 contract’s integration clause superseded all previous agreements between the parties.
The appellant was represented by Jonathan R. Waldron and Jaclyn N. Warr.
The respondent was represented by John S. Kingston, Kristen E. Sanocki and Allison B. Spors.
Attorneys for the parties did not respond to requests for comments.
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District case number: ED112409