Best Buy Stores v. Developers Diversified Realty, et al., No. 10-3625 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseBest Buy sued various commercial landlords and the landlords' property manager, DDRC, alleging that DDRC impermissibly charged Best Buy for insurance-related costs under various lease agreements. The court held that the district court did not err in deciding that the landlords breached their various lease agreements by charging Best Buy for the First Dollar Program in an attempt to meet its insurance obligations under the leases. Based on the unambiguous language of the leases, the court found the landlords' interpretation of the leases to be unreasonable. Because the landlords breached the leases, the court found that the district court did not err in determining that the landlords breached their contracts with Best Buy. Therefore, the court affirmed the district court's order granting summary judgment to Best Buy on its breach of contract claims for 2005-2009. Because the court found that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to Best Buy, the court need not address the applicable pre-judgment interest rate until after the resolution of Best Buy's breach of contract claims for the 1999-2004 lease years. Finally, the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Best Buy's remaining fraud claims with prejudice. Accordingly, the court affirmed in part, reversed in part, remanding for further proceedings.
Court Description: Civil case - Contracts. District court did not err in finding defendants' interpretation of the leases in question was unreasonable and that they breached the leases by failing to obtain insurance in accordance with the leases' requirements; there were disputed issues of fact concerning Best Buy's knowledge of the particular insurance program, and the court erred in rejecting defendants' equitable defenses for the years 1999-2004 and in granting Best Buy summary judgment on its claim for those years; district court did not err in granting Best Buy summary judgment, however, on its breach of contract claims for 2005-2009; district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Best Buy's remaining fraud claims with prejudice.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.