[brief] TABLE OF CONTENTS  PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ........................................................................................................1  PROCEDURAL HISTORY .............................................................................................................3  STATEMENT OF FACTS..............................................................................................................6  I.  THE MACK-CALI AGREEMENT BETWEEN BIRCH AND THE SELLER .........................................................6  II.  THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BETWEEN BIRCH AND PLAINTIFF ..................................................7  III.  THE ATTEMPTED CLOSINGS AND PLAINTIFF’S TERMINATION OF THE PSA  ..................................................11  A.  Plaintiff’s Post-Termination Actions  ..................................................................................14  LEGAL ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S APPEAL ..................................................17  I.  STANDARD OF REVIEW .......................................................................................................17  II.  THE TRIAL COURT  PROPERLY DISMISSED  PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS AGAINST OLD REPUBLIC  BECAUSE PLAINTIFF TERMINATED THE PSA ..................................................................................19  A.  Plaintiff Terminated The PSA By Electing To Take Back Its Deposit ..................................................19  B.  Plaintiff’s Purchase Right Did Not Survive The Return Of The Escrow And Termination Of The PSA ..................................................................................23  1.  Termination and Specific Performance Are Mutually Exclusive Remedies ..................................................23  2.  The words “notwithstanding” and “in addition to” in of Section 13.1 of the PSA Did Not Give the Plaintiff the Right to Seek Specific Performance After Terminating the Contract ..................................................................................28  3.  The PSA Did Not Define [...]’s Obligation To Sell the Property Pursuant to a Claim of Specific Performance As A “Termination Surviving Obligation” ...........................................29  4.  There is Nothing Unfair About Enforcing the Contractual Terms Agreed to by the Parties ..........................................................30  C.  The Right To Specific Performance In The PSA Was Contingent On Conditions That Were Not Met .........................................................32  D.  Because The PSA Was Terminated, Dismissal Of All Of 101  Hudson’s Claims Must Be Upheld ...............................................................33  III.  THE COURT’S ORDER DISMISSING THE CLAIMS AGAINST OLD REPUBLIC CAN BE SUSTAINED ON OTHER GROUNDS  ..................42  A.  Plaintiff Fails to Allege Breach of Contract ..............................................42  B.  Plaintiff Fails to Allege Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith ...44  C.  Plaintiff Cannot State A Claim for Negligent Misrepresentation  47  D.  Plaintiff Does Not State A Claim for Breach of Fiduciary Duty ..51  E.  Plaintiff Cannot Plead a Claim for Aiding and Abetting a Breach of Contract ....................................................................................................53  F.  Plaintiff Does Not Plead a Claim for the Violation of an Extra-Contractual Duty  .....................................................................................................55  G.  The Language Of The PSA Bars Plaintiff’s Claims ...............................57  LEGAL ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF OLD REPUBLIC’S CROSS-APPEAL (Pa688; T5) .........................................................................................59