Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

What's New in the Law

By Robert W. Ihne
January 29, 2009

Vendor Issues

Capitol Business Solutions, LLC v. Konica Minolta Business Solutions USA, Inc., 2008 WL 2761307 (U.S.Dist.Ct. D.Kansas July 14, 2008). While this decision focuses on the particularities of the plaintiff-lessor's pleadings, it serves to illustrate potential risks when a lessor relies on its vendor partner to bill and collect lease payments from the lessees whose use of the vendor's equipment is being financed by the lessor. Here, the lessor contends that the vendor failed to remit such payments to the lessor in a timely manner, causing various types of damage to the lessor, including injury to its relationship with its bank.

Forum Selection, Jurisdiction, and Choice of Law

New Horizons Electric, Inc. v. IFC Credit Corp., 2008 WL 4597419 (Colo.App. Oct. 16, 2008) (unpublished). This Colorado appellate court affirmed the dismissal of actions brought by a number of NorVergence lessees against a group of NorVergence assignees. The dismissal was the result of enforcing forum selection clauses in the leases ' some containing the so-called “floating” forum selection clause ' requiring that actions be brought in other states. Holding, consistent with another Colorado appellate court, that forum selection clauses are prima facie valid, this court found that the plaintiff-lessees did not demonstrate that they were fraudulently induced to agree to the forum selection clauses specifically (as opposed to being fraudulently induced to enter into the leases generally). The court also dismissed plaintiffs' arguments that their agreement to the forum selection clauses was induced by fraud in the factum inasmuch as such claim was tied to a claim of relief based on the Uniform Consumer Credit Code, which the court held is not applicable to commercial transactions such as these.

Polzin v. Appleway Equipment Leasing, Inc., 191 P.3d 476 (Mont. 2008). The Montana Supreme Court reverses a lower court's denial of a lessor's motion to dismiss for improper venue. The lease contained provisions choosing the state of Washington ' both for the law governing the lease and for the venue of any action (if elected by the lessor). The decision holds both that Washington law recognizes forum selection clauses as valid and that, contrary to statements in the lower court's opinion, Montana law does not regard such clauses as void as against public policy.


Robert W. Ihne is an attorney with 25 years of experience in commercial financing, primarily in the areas of secured transactions and equipment leasing. Such experience has included drafting, negotiating and providing advice related to direct transactions, syndications, vendor financing arrangements, and various forms of credit enhancements such as guaranties and letters of credit. He may be reached at [email protected]. The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Erin Staton and Ed Gross of Vedder Price Kaufman & Kammholz, P.C. in the preparation of this update.

Vendor Issues

Capitol Business Solutions, LLC v. Konica Minolta Business Solutions USA, Inc., 2008 WL 2761307 (U.S.Dist.Ct. D.Kansas July 14, 2008). While this decision focuses on the particularities of the plaintiff-lessor's pleadings, it serves to illustrate potential risks when a lessor relies on its vendor partner to bill and collect lease payments from the lessees whose use of the vendor's equipment is being financed by the lessor. Here, the lessor contends that the vendor failed to remit such payments to the lessor in a timely manner, causing various types of damage to the lessor, including injury to its relationship with its bank.

Forum Selection, Jurisdiction, and Choice of Law

New Horizons Electric, Inc. v. IFC Credit Corp., 2008 WL 4597419 (Colo.App. Oct. 16, 2008) (unpublished). This Colorado appellate court affirmed the dismissal of actions brought by a number of NorVergence lessees against a group of NorVergence assignees. The dismissal was the result of enforcing forum selection clauses in the leases ' some containing the so-called “floating” forum selection clause ' requiring that actions be brought in other states. Holding, consistent with another Colorado appellate court, that forum selection clauses are prima facie valid, this court found that the plaintiff-lessees did not demonstrate that they were fraudulently induced to agree to the forum selection clauses specifically (as opposed to being fraudulently induced to enter into the leases generally). The court also dismissed plaintiffs' arguments that their agreement to the forum selection clauses was induced by fraud in the factum inasmuch as such claim was tied to a claim of relief based on the Uniform Consumer Credit Code, which the court held is not applicable to commercial transactions such as these.

Polzin v. Appleway Equipment Leasing, Inc. , 191 P.3d 476 (Mont. 2008). The Montana Supreme Court reverses a lower court's denial of a lessor's motion to dismiss for improper venue. The lease contained provisions choosing the state of Washington ' both for the law governing the lease and for the venue of any action (if elected by the lessor). The decision holds both that Washington law recognizes forum selection clauses as valid and that, contrary to statements in the lower court's opinion, Montana law does not regard such clauses as void as against public policy.


Robert W. Ihne is an attorney with 25 years of experience in commercial financing, primarily in the areas of secured transactions and equipment leasing. Such experience has included drafting, negotiating and providing advice related to direct transactions, syndications, vendor financing arrangements, and various forms of credit enhancements such as guaranties and letters of credit. He may be reached at [email protected]. The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Erin Staton and Ed Gross of Vedder Price Kaufman & Kammholz, P.C. in the preparation of this update.

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.