Honeywell, Inc. v. San Francisco Housing Authority

Good Law
164 F. Supp. 2d 1130·2001 WL 376337·2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4529
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaApril 12, 2001C97-4314 TEHCalifornia5,355 words

Opinion

Opinion

Henderson, J.

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff Honeywell, Inc.’s (“Honeywell”) Motion for Judgement as a Matter of Law, or in the Alternative, For a New Trial pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 50(b) and 59. In addition, the Court is in receipt of the parties’ supplemental memoranda regarding plaintiffs Motion for Equitable Relief, which the Court denied . in part and deferred in part in its order of August 31, 2000. Having carefully considered the parties’ written arguments, and the entire record herein, the motions are denied in part and granted in part as set forth below.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff brought this action alleging that (1) the San Francisco Housing Authority (“SFHA”) had breached its contract with Honeywell by failing to pay for any of the goods and services provided, and (2) that SFHA had violated 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by failing to pay Honeywell 50 percent of the energy savings achieved, as a result of the contract, pursuant to 24 C.F.R. § 990.107(f)(1). After a vigorously tried two-week trial, the jury entered a verdict in favor of SFHA on both counts. With respect to the contract claim, the jury found that (1) Honeywell and the SFHA had “agreed”…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.