jennifersteen//February 3, 2014//
Appellant challenged the District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of respondent. Appellant argued that the District Court erroneously concluded that appellant waived the affirmative defense of failure of consideration to respondent’s breach-of-contract claim and that there were no genuine issues of material fact regarding both this affirmative defense and appellant’s assent to respondent’s statement of account. Respondent is a law firm who represented appellant. It was undisputed that respondent in fact performed the services referenced in the invoices. Appellant nevertheless argued that, “because there was no reasonable prospect for settlement,” respondent intentionally rendered services that had “no value,” resulting in a “failure of consideration. The Court of Appeals held that, because appellant’s affirmative defense rests on mere averments, the District Court did not err by granting summary judgment in favor of respondent’s on its breach-of-contract claim. Affirmed.
A13-0971 Leonard, Street & Deinard, P.A. v. Broms (Hennepin County)