Centigram Argentina., S.A. v. Centigram Inc.

Good Law
60 F. Supp. 2d 1003·1999 WL 640100·1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12889
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 18, 1999C 98 21281 EAICalifornia9,564 words

Opinion

Opinion

Infante, J.

ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

I. INTRODUCTION

Presently before the Court is Defendant Centigram Communications Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment, which came on for hearing on August 2, 1999.' The parties appeared through their respective counsel of record. Having considered the papers submitted by the parties and the arguments of counsel at oral argument, and good cause appearing for the reasons set forth below, the Court denies in part and grants in part Defendant’s motion.

II. BACKGROUND

Defendant Centigram Communications (“Centigram”) is a California corporation that provides voicemail equipment and services. Plaintiff Centigram Argentina (“CASA”) is an Argentina corporation who was the exclusive distributor for Centigram’s voicemail equipment and services in portions of South America, specifically Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay. Plaintiff has sued Defendant for breach of contract and for business torts (intentional and negligent interference with existing and prospective economic advantage, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing). Defendant has now moved for summary judgment on all…

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.