A.L. Prime Energy Consultant, Inc. v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (Lawyers Weekly No. 12-052-17)
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SUFFOLK, ss. SUPERIOR COURT
CIVIL ACTION
- 1684CV05562
A.L. PRIME ENERGY CONSULTANT, INC.
vs.
MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
RESERVIATION AND REPORT OF AN INTERLOCUTORY ORDER TO THE APPEALS COURT
This action arises out of a contract between the plaintiff, A.L. Prime Energy Consultant, Inc. (Prime), and the defendant, Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) for the supply of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel (ULSDF) (the Supply Contract), and the unilateral termination of the Supply Contract by the MBTA. Prime asserts, among other claims, that the MBTA breached the Supply Contract by terminating it before its end date.
Categories: News Tags: 1205217, A.L., Authority, Consultant, Energy, Inc., Lawyers, massachusetts, Prime, Transportation, Weekly
A.L. Prime Energy Consultant, Inc. v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (Lawyers Weekly No. 12-052-17)
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SUFFOLK, ss. SUPERIOR COURT
CIVIL ACTION
- 1684CV05562
A.L. PRIME ENERGY CONSULTANT, INC.
vs.
MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
RESERVIATION AND REPORT OF AN INTERLOCUTORY ORDER TO THE APPEALS COURT
This action arises out of a contract between the plaintiff, A.L. Prime Energy Consultant, Inc. (Prime), and the defendant, Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) for the supply of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel (ULSDF) (the Supply Contract), and the unilateral termination of the Supply Contract by the MBTA. Prime asserts, among other claims, that the MBTA breached the Supply Contract by terminating it before its end date.
Categories: News Tags: 1205217, A.L., Authority, Consultant, Energy, Inc., Lawyers, massachusetts, Prime, Transportation, Weekly
A.L. Prime Energy Consultant, Inc. v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (Lawyers Weekly No. 12-027-17)
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SUFFOLK, ss.SUPERIOR COURT
CIVIL ACTION
- 1677CV01366
A.L. PRIME ENERGY CONSULTANT, INC.
vs.
MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
In July 2016, defendant Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) terminated its two-year fuel supply agreement with plaintiff A.L. Prime Energy Consultant, Inc. (Prime). The MBTA explained that thetermination was made pursuant to its exercise of a contractual right that permitted termination for convenience.The MBTA terminated the contract in order to take advantage of cost savings it believed it could achieve by purchasing fuel through the Commonwealth’s existing statewide fuel contract. Prime alleges that the MBTA abused its discretion when it invoked the termination for convenience provision and that therefore the MBTA is liable for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The matter is now before the Court on the MBTA’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). For the reasons that follow, the motion is DENIED.
Categories: News Tags: 1202717, A.L., Authority, Consultant, Energy, Inc., Lawyers, massachusetts, Prime, Transportation, Weekly