Skip to main content
· 7/10/2018

Premier Imaging/Medical Systems, Inc. v. Coffey Family Medical Clinic, P.C.

Syllabus

This appeal arises from a breach of contract action. Premier Imaging/Medical Systems, Inc. (\Premier\) contracted with Coffey Family Medical Clinic, P.C. (\CFMC\), an organization formed by Dr. D. Bruce Coffey, M.D. (\Dr. Coffey\), for a five year servicing contract (\the Contract\) under which Premier would provide service for a CT Scanner (\the Scanner\). Pioneer Health Services of Oneida (\Pioneer\) and Dr. Coffey later entered into an agreement whereby Pioneer assumed certain obligations, apparently including the Contract. At CFMC's request, Premier began billing Pioneer. Pioneer eventually stopped making payments under the Contract. Premier sued CFMC in the Circuit Court for Scott County (\the Trial Court\) to recover on the remainder of the Contract. CFMC argued that Pioneer became a substituted obligor under a theory of novation. After trial, the Trial Court held that CFMC failed to prove novation, awarded Premier $89,166.60 for the twenty months remaining on the Contract, and granted prejudgment interest of ten percent from the end of the Contract for a total of $105,534.70. CFMC appeals. We hold, inter alia, that the Trial Court did not err in holding that CFMC was unable to meet its burden of proving that novation, implied or otherwise, occurred. We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • authorizing courts to take judicial notice of prior judgments, opinions, and other matters of public records attached to a motion to dismiss
  • authorizing judicial notice of prior judgment, opinions, and other matters of public record attached to a motion to dismiss
  • explaining Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal is “appropriate if the res judicata bar is apparent from the complaint and judicially noticed facts and the plaintiff fails to challenge the defendant’s failure to plead it as an affirmative defense”
  • “[F]ederal courts sitting in diversity apply the preclusion law of the forum state unless it is incompatible with federal interests.”
  • “[F]ederal courts sitting in diversity apply the preclusion law of the forum state unless it is incompatible with federal interests.”
  • “Ours is at least the third judicial notice Anderson has been given regarding her frivolous filings.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Judge D. Michael Swiney, C.J.

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.