Opinion ID: 2345453
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: MRA Rates

Text: Having established that Appellee properly stated a contract claim against Appellants, we turn next to the question of whether Appellants breached the parties' contract by charging rate M rather than rate D for copies from electronic records. Where one party to a contract without any legal justification, breaches the contract, the other party is entitled to recover, unless the contract provided otherwise, whatever damages he suffered, provided (1) they were such as would naturally and ordinarily result from the breach, or (2) they were reasonably foreseeable and within the contemplation of the parties at the time they made the contract, and (3) they can be proved with reasonable certainty. Ferrer, 825 A.2d at 610. As we noted above, the parties agreed by contract that Appellants would provide copies in accordance with the terms of the MRA. See supra at 8. Appellants allege that the MRA provides prices for copies from paper and from microfilm records only. Therefore, Appellants argue, electronic records can be billed at any reasonable rate. Because Appellee failed to prove at trial that Appellants' rates were unreasonable, Appellants claim that summary judgment should have been entered in their favor. Appellants' Brief at 25-32. The MRA states in relevant part that the price for copies shall not exceed rate D for paper copies and rate M for copies from microfilm. 42 Pa.C.S. § 6152(a)(2)(i). Appellants assert that the legislature intended the phrase for paper copies to mean copies from paper records only. Appellants' Reply Brief at 12. Based on their reading of the statute, Appellants argue that the MRA does not provide a specific rate for copies from electronic records and, citing to 42 Pa.C.S. § 6152(a)(1), Appellants claim that copies from electronic records can be charged at a reasonable rate. Appellants' Brief at 29. We disagree. The object of all interpretation and construction of statutes is to ascertain and effectuate the intention of the General Assembly. 1 Pa.C.S. § 1921(a). When the words of a statute are clear and free from all ambiguity, the letter of it is not to be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing its spirit. 1 Pa.C.S. § 1921(b). The language of the MRA is clear: when providing paper copies from any medium, Appellants are entitled to receive rate D per page. [8] The only exception is when the copies are made from microfilm; then, Appellants can charge the higher rate M. Here, Appellants made paper copies from electronic records and not from microfilm so the rate for paper copies, rate D, applies. [9] We affirm the lower courts' holdings that the MRA created a higher price rate for copies from microfilm, rate M, and a default rate, rate D, for copies from all other media. See Trial Ct. Memo, at 8; Liss & Marion, 937 A.2d at 512-13. [10]