ANGEL LEARNING, INC. v. HOUGHTON MIFFLIN HARCOURT PUBLISHING COMPANY
1:08-cv-01259
S.D. Ind.Dec 1, 2010Background
- Contract between ANGEL and HMH for customized ANGEL LMS and related programs; HMH licensed and hosted Think Central 2 with expected customization.
- Think Central 2 failed Verification Tests; HMH provided notice but issues remained unresolved.
- HMH terminated the contract on January 9, 2009; ANGEL had already filed suit seeking fees tied to a breach.
- August 12, 2010 summary judgment order denied substantial relief to both sides; interpreted ANGEL LMS to include customization.
- December 1, 2010 order denied ANGEL’s motion to reconsider two aspects: ANGEL LMS interpretation and Mercer Affidavit.
- Mercer Affidavit was previously before the court and did not raise a new genuine issue of material fact.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interpretation of ANGEL LMS term | ANGEL argues ANGEL LMS is separate from Think Central 2 | HMH support that ANGEL LMS includes customization | ANGEL LMS includes customized ANGEL software per order |
| Mercer Affidavit’s effect on breaches | Mercer affidavit creates genuine issue of material fact | Affidavit is not new evidence and does not create a factual issue | No genuine issue; consideration previously addressed; no breachShown |
Key Cases Cited
- Caisse Nationale de Credit Agricole v. CBI Indus., Inc., 90 F.3d 1264 (7th Cir. 1996) (manifest error standard for reconsideration)
- Oto v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 224 F.3d 601 (7th Cir. 2000) (manifest error required for reconsideration)
- Cameo Convalescent Ctr., Inc. v. Percy, 800 F.2d 108 (7th Cir. 1986) (law-of-the-case and reconsideration limits)
- In re 949 Erie St., Racine, Wis., 824 F.2d 538 (7th Cir. 1987) (reconsideration standards for interlocutory orders)