An alarm company entered into an agreement to install a security system at a store and also agreed to provide a “central station signal receiving and notification service.”

The defendant alarm company had a clause in its contract giving “either party” the right to have “an action or dispute” resolved by binding arbitration before an arbitrator instead of a judge in court. The plaintiff filed an action in small claims court for damages for breach of contract, breach of warranty and fraud. The defendant alarm company made a motion to dismiss the action and to compel arbitration.

The question of whether or not an individual is an employee or independent contractor comes up frequently and the principles for making such determination are worth discussion.

In the case, a motorcyclist collided into the driver side door of the deputy’s patrol car when the deputy opened it to exit the car to make contact with the motorist he had stopped for a traffic violation.

In a recent case before the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, the court had to decide whether to hold the plaintiff alarm company liable for the amount of the limitation of liability provision contained in the contract.

In a recent case before the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, the court had to decide whether to hold the plaintiff alarm company liable for the amount of the limitation of liability provision contained in the contract.

In this two-part series, Les Gold expertly breaks down a major case for the fire alarm industry involving the Lisle-Woodridge Fire Protection District. Part one, in the November issue, analyzed the illegal actions of the district and subsequent injunctions while part two breaks down the resulting modified permanent injunction

In this two-part series, Les Gold expertly breaks down a major case for the fire alarm industry involving the Lisle-Woodridge Fire Protection District.

 In a case decided this past year in the state of Massachusetts, a court ruled a city ordinance that restricted approved fire signaling devices and systems conflicted with the state law. 

In a recent case in the state of Florida, a group of investors alleged they were victims of a Ponzi scheme and filed an action against a company and its directors.