Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

BP Amoco Chemical Co. v. FHR Resources LLC

December 19, 2008

BP AMOCO CHEMICAL COMPANY, PLAINTIFF/COUNTER--DEFENDANT,
v.
FHR RESOURCES LLC, DEFENDANT/COUNTER--PLAINTIFF.
FHR RESOURCES LLC, THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF,
v.
BP CORPORATION NORTH AMERICA INC., DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge James B. Moran

Motion Ex. 12

PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT: DAMAGES BP AMOCO CHEMICAL COMPANY AND BP CORPORATION NORTH AMERICA INC.'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON FLINT HILLS RESOURCES, LLC'S ALLEGED "DAMAGES" CLAIMS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page(s)

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................................................... ii

INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1

BACKGROUND

.............................................................................................................................2

ARGUMENT...................................................................................................................................3

I. THE PSA PROHIBITS FHR FROM RECOVERING THE DAMAGES CALCULATED BY EITHER BETTIUS OR BALIBAN. .................................................3

II. FHR CANNOT RECOVER REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT COSTS BECAUSE IT HAS FAILED TO PROVIDE THE LEGALLY REQUIRED EVIDENCE OF DIMINUTION IN FAIR MARKET VALUE. ....................................................................4

A. FHR Has Not Produced The Legally Required Evidence Of The Diminution In Fair Market Value For Its Claims. ...................................................5

B. The Repair And Replacement Costs FHR Seeks Are Grossly Disproportionate To The FMV Values Agreed To By The Parties. ........................8

III. FHR'S DAMAGES WOULD PUT IT IN A FAR BETTER POSITION THAN IF THE CONTRACT HAD NOT ALLEGEDLY BEEN BREACHED..................................9

IV. FHR'S DAMAGES ARE BASED ON SPECULATIVE GUESSES, OUTDATED ESTIMATES, OR OTHERWISE ARE NOT REASONABLY CERTAIN. .........................................................................................................................10

V. FHR HAS FAILED TO SHOW THAT DAMAGES FOR VARIOUS CLAIMS WERE PROXIMATELY CAUSED BY ANY ALLEGED BREACH OR FRAUD. .............................................................................................................................11

VI. FHR CANNOT RECOVER PUNITIVE OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. .....................12

A. The PSA Bars Punitive And Exemplary Damages For Any Claims. ....................12

B. FHR Has No Evidence That Would Satisfy The High Threshold Necessary To Award Punitive Damages.................................................................................12

CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................14

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page(s)

Cases

Albrecht v. Herald Co., 452 F.2d 124 (8th Cir. 1971) .............................................................................................. 4

AMPAT/Midwest, Inc. v. Illinois Tool Works Inc., 896 F.2d 1035 (7th Cir. 1990); ......................................................................................... 12

Ass'n Benefit Servs., Inc. v. Caremark Rx, Inc., 493 F.3d 841 (7th Cir. 2007) .............................................................................................. 3

Bodine Sewer, Inc. v. Eastern Ill. Precast, Inc., 493 N.E.2d 705 (Ill. App. Ct. 1986) ................................................................................... 7

Chrysler Corp. v. State Prop. Tax Appeal Bd., 387 N.E.2d 351 (Ill. App. Ct. 1979) ................................................................................... 7

Classic Bowl, Inc. v. AMF Pinspotters, Inc., 403 F.2d 463 (7th Cir. 1968) ............................................................................................ 11

Covey v. Davlin, 2001 WL 34076375, at *14 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. Sept. 10, 2001)............................................ 6

D.P. Brian & Son v. H.A. Bom Packers' Supply Co., 1917 WL 1840, at *4 (Ill. App. Ct. 1917)........................................................................... 8

EBWS, LLC v. Britly Corp., 928 A.2d 497 (Vt. 2007)................................................................................................... 10

Europlast, Ltd. v. Oak Switch Sys., Inc., 10 F.3d 1266 (7th Cir. 1993) ............................................................................................ 13

First Nat'l Bank of Elgin v. Dusold, 536 N.E.2d 100 (Ill. App. Ct. 1989) ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.