3 Turtle Ridge opposed arbitration, noting SBC had never entered into a direct contractual relationship with it, and therefore SBC could not enforce the arbitration provision against it. SBC's contract with Clientlogic, SBC observed, contained an arbitration clause covering “any controversy arising under, out of, in connection with, or relating to” the contract, which, according to SBC, applied to Turtle Ridge's claims against SBC. It argued Turtle Ridge's claims arose from Turtle Ridge's subcontract with Clientlogic, which had incorporated the contract between Clientlogic and SBC. It alleged causes of action for fraud and deceit, unlawful conduct by a public utility, unfair business practices, intentional and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage, and quantum meruit. In response, Clientlogic terminated Turtle Ridge's subcontract. When Clientlogic did so, SBC attempted to cover up its scheme by terminating Clientlogic's contract. Turtle Ridge asked Clientlogic to discuss the exaggerated number with SBC. In addition to defrauding advertisers, the inflated number defrauded Turtle Ridge because it had calculated its contract price using that number. SBC had inflated the number because it allowed SBC to charge higher advertising rates to advertisers in the phonebook, who paid rates based on the phonebook's circulation. Unknown to Turtle Ridge, SBC's request for bids on the contract had deliberately exaggerated the number of phonebooks Clientlogic and Turtle Ridge were to deliver. Accordingly, Clientlogic awarded a subcontract to Turtle Ridge incorporating the contract between SBC and Clientlogic for hand and mail delivery of SBC phonebooks.Īccording to the complaint, after entering into the subcontract, Turtle Ridge began to discover that many of the phonebooks were undeliverable because their delivery addresses were invalid. SBC awarded the contract to Clientlogic and expressly authorized Clientlogic to subcontract work to Turtle Ridge. Turtle Ridge and Clientlogic agreed to work together to win SBC's contract, and their efforts prevailed. SBC believed that by pooling their resources, Turtle Ridge and Clientlogic might be able to submit a successful bid. (Clientlogic), which was also bidding on SBC's phonebook delivery contract. SBC suggested Turtle Ridge contact Clientlogic Operating Company, Inc. In the intervening time, however, SBC had changed its approach to delivering phonebooks and was therefore interested in Turtle Ridge's proposal. 2 In the past, SBC had declined to work with Turtle Ridge because the company was too small. In the spring of 2002, it made a sales call to the offices of SBC Smart Yellow Pages (SBC) hoping to get some of SBC's business. is in the business of hand delivering printed advertising media. We reverse and direct the court to order arbitration. #Pacific bell white pages california trialPacific Bell Directory doing business as SBC Smart Yellow Pages, SBC Communications, Inc., and SBC Directory Operations appeal from the trial court's order denying their petition to compel. Schmit III, and Boris Orlov, Los Angeles, for Plaintiff and Respondent. Roberts, Walnut Creek, for Defendants and Appellants. Decided: June 21, 2006ījork Lawrence,Robert K. PACIFIC BELL DIRECTORY et al., Defendants and Appellants.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |