Court Opinion

ID: 9899547
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-16 21:01:03.552108+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:38.807939
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1746      Doc: 36         Filed: 11/15/2023    Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-1746

        KVC WAFFLES LTD., A United Kingdom Private Limited Company,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        NEW CARBON COMPANY, LLC, An Indiana Limited Liability Company,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        Lydia Kay Griggsby, District Judge. (1:20-cv-00195-LKG)

        Submitted: October 13, 2023                                 Decided: November 15, 2023

        Before THACKER and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Vernon W. Johnson, III, NIXON PEABODY, LLP, Washington, D.C., for
        Appellant. Matthew M. Saxon, John W. H. Harding, Lauren Gailey, WINSTON &
        STRAWN, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1746      Doc: 36         Filed: 11/15/2023     Pg: 2 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               KVC Waffles Ltd. (KVC) appeals the district court’s order granting summary

        judgment to Defendant in its civil action for breach of contract and tortious interference.

        See KVC Waffles Ltd. v. New Carbon Co., LLC, No. 1:20-cv-00195-LKG (D. Md. June 28,

        2022). The district court determined that the doctrine of mutual default under Maryland

        state law barred the claim for breach of a 2009 distributorship agreement and that KVC

        could not prevail on its tortious interference claims because it had not met its burden to

        show that Defendant’s claimed tortious conduct caused its injuries or that it incurred

        damages as a result of such conduct.

               Reviewing the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendant de novo,

        Smith v. CSRA, 12 F.4th 396, 402 (4th Cir. 2021), we find no reversible error. We affirm

        the grant of summary judgment to Defendant on KVC’s claim for breach of contract on the

        basis that KVC did not satisfy the condition precedent to its recovery by proving its own

        performance or an excuse for nonperformance based on its failure to fulfill its timely

        payment obligation in the 2009 agreement, see Hubler Rentals, Inc. v. Roadway Express,

        Inc., 637 F.2d 257, 260-61 (4th Cir. 1981) (per curiam), and we reject as without merit

        KVC’s appellate arguments challenging the denial of relief on this claim. We also find no

        reversible error in the district court’s ruling granting summary judgment to Defendant on

        the tortious interference claims, see Med. Mut. Liab. Soc’y of Md. v. B. Dixon Evander &

        Assocs., Inc., 660 A.2d 433, 439 (Md. 1995), and reject as without merit KVC’s appellate

        arguments challenging the denial of relief on these claims. We dispense with oral argument

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1746      Doc: 36         Filed: 11/15/2023      Pg: 3 of 3

        because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this

        court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                        AFFIRMED

                                                     3