The sole claim on which InfoComp was permitted to go forward against Chelgraph was for breach of the written agreement's 90-day warranty provision against defective material, poor workmanship, and nonconformity with the system's written specifications as to functions and processes. On that claim, the jury returned a verdict in favor of InfoComp. The district court exercised jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332, diversity of citizenship. We have appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291. Our review of the district court's interpretation and application of state law is plenary.
All parties agree that their dispute is governed by Pennsylvania law.
We first address the effect of the InfoComp-Electra purchase agreement. 236 Pa. Super. Such is precisely the fact pattern before us. In Cucchi, a lessor was barred from asserting a limitation on liability provision in a contract because that contract had not been signed by a representative of its home office. Although the contract in Cucchi had been signed by a branch office representative, the court construed the agreement strictly and found the lack of a home office signature to be dispositive.