Trip Mate, Inc. v. Stonebridge Casualty Ins., et al., No. 13-2032 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseStonebridge appealed the district court's judgment in favor of Trip Mate, holding that Stonebridge breached an implied amendment to the parties' Managing General Agent Agreement that was incorporated into the Termination Agreement they executed in 2009. The court reversed the district court's judgment in favor of Trip Mate and remanded with instructions to dismiss the case. The court concluded that the district court's comments to the parties regarding their course of dealings were too vague and ambiguous to provide the parties with actual notice that the court amended the pleadings to include the implied amendment theory. The parties did not have actual notice of the implied amendment issue or an adequate opportunity to cure the suprise of this issue being added to the case.
Court Description: Civil case - Contracts. The parties did not expressly consent to trying the "implied amendment" issue the district court relied on in reaching its decision in favor of Trip Mate, nor did the parties try the issue by implied consent; as the district court erred in adding the implied amendment theory to the pleadings, the judgment in favor of Trip Mate is reversed.
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.