Analysis Group, Inc. v. Central Florida Investments, Inc.
629 F.3d 18
| 1st Cir. | 2010Background
- CFI, a Florida time-share operator, was sued by Bluegreen for securities-law violations related to a leadership change.
- AGI provided expert research and support services for Bebchuk in the Bluegreen litigation, under an arrangement coordinated by Green-spoon Marder and White & Case.
- CFI authorized Bebchuk’s retention through AGI, but disputed whether AGI’s support services were authorized independently by Greenspoon Marder.
- A September 18, 2006 deadline accelerated the submission of the expert report; AGI and Bebchuk worked from Sept 9–18, 2006 with White & Case as primary contact.
- CFI ultimately refused to pay AGI’s invoiced fees; AGI sued in Massachusetts federal court and was awarded damages after a jury verdict and post-trial adjustments, including prejudgment interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agency for hiring AGI | CFI contends Greenspoon Marder wasn’t an agent for AGI’s engagement. | CFI acknowledges Greenspoon Marder acted as its agent; trial supported authorization. | Agency instruction was supported; no reversible error. |
| Jury instructions on agency | CFI argues the instruction improperly treated Greenspoon Marder as indisputable CFI agent for all purposes. | AGI argues the instructions correctly reflected agency and authority. | Instructions properly permitted the jury to decide scope of agency; no error warranting judgment as a matter of law or new trial. |
| Prejudgment interest | CFI contends the start date for prejudgment interest was not established. | AGI relied on admitted date of submission of invoice as the start date. | Date of demand established by admission; prejudgment interest proper under Massachusetts law. |
| Sanctions on appeal | CFI challenges sanctions as frivolous. | AGI seeks sanctions for frivolous appeal. | Appeal not frivolous or vexatious; sanctions denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brook Village North Assocs. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 686 F.2d 66 (1st Cir. 1982) (agency by implication; scope of authority matters)
- Che v. Massachusetts Bay Transp. Auth., 342 F.3d 31 (1st Cir. 2003) (de novo review standards for JMOL)
- Quiles-Quiles v. Henderson, 439 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2006) (preservation and standard of review for trial errors)
- Estate of Keatinge v. Biddle, 316 F.3d 7 (1st Cir. 2002) (plain error review in appellate context)
- Meschino v. N. Am. Drager, Inc., 841 F.2d 429 (1st Cir. 1988) (prejudgment interest timing and evidence considerations)