Total Coverage, Inc. v. Cendant Settlement Services Group, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM **
Appellant Total Coverage, Inc. Appeals dismissal of its complaint for failure to state a claim. We affirm for the reasons discussed below.
Fii'st, the Agreement to Negotiate did not categorically prohibit Cendant from negotiating with T-Mobile. The unambiguous language of the Agreement explicitly gave Total Coverage a “non-exclusive right to negotiate on [Cendant’s] behalf.” Nothing in the Agreement supports Total Coverage’s theory that this language means Cendant cannot negotiate on its own behalf, or that the agreement is “non-exclusive” only as to “other third-party vendors.”…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.California Supreme Court · 2003
- Della Penna v. Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1995
- Buckaloo v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- McCalden v. California Library Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Casa Herrera, Inc. v. BeydounCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lucas v. City of VisaliaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2010
- Cole v. Amazon.com Services LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2025
- Day v. GEICO Casualty CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2022
- Food Recovery Network, Inc. v. Means Database, Inc. D/B/A foodrecovery.orgDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2026
- J & M Sales Inc. - Adversary ProceedingUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · 2020
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.