Case ID: f-appx_15/html/0539-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ELECTRO SOURCE, INC., a California Corporation, Electro Source, Inc. Plaintiff-counter-defendants Appellee v. AMERICAN BUSINESS INFORMATION, INC., a Nebraska Corporation Defendant, and Infousa Inc., fka American Business Information, Inc., Defendant-x-claim-3rd-party Plaintiff—Appellant v. Micro Tech Marketing, Services, Inc., a California Corporation, Third-party-defendant—Appellee.
    No. 00-55180.
    D.C. No. CV-98-08125-MMM.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted July 12, 2001.
    Decided Aug. 1, 2001.
    Before RYMER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, Judge.
    
    
      
       Honorable Jane A. Restani, Judge, United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

We affirm the judgments of the district court on both Appellee’s claim for breach of contract and Appellant’s claim for indemnity for the reasons stated therein. In addition, we reject Appellant’s argument raised on appeal that the representation agreement entered into by Appellees related to all software to be distributed through “budget channels.” There is nothing in the agreement that indicates that the language limiting the representation to “budget inventory” refers to the nature of retail outlets rather than the software itself. Thus, as Appellant has presented no further support for the proposition that Micro Tech’s agency relationship with Electro Source covered the transaction at issue, the contract may not be rescinded under the “dual agency” theory.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.