Court Opinion

ID: 9959368
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-11 16:11:17.402432+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:28.661159
License: Public Domain

J-A15035-21

 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

 VINCULUM, INC                             :    IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
                                           :         PENNSYLVANIA
                    Appellant              :
                                           :
                                           :
              v.                           :
                                           :
                                           :
 GOLI TECHNOLOGIES, LLC                    :    No. 2048 EDA 2020

          Appeal from the Judgment Entered September 22, 2020
   In the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County Civil Division at No(s):
                             No. 2015-06333

 VINCULUM, INC                             :    IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
                                           :         PENNSYLVANIA
                                           :
              v.                           :
                                           :
                                           :
 GOLI TECHNOLOGIES, LLC                    :
                                           :
                    Appellant              :    No. 2127 EDA 2020

          Appeal from the Judgment Entered September 22, 2020
   In the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County Civil Division at No(s):
                             No. 2015-06333

BEFORE: BOWES, J., STABILE, J., and MUSMANNO, J.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY BOWES, J.:                           FILED APRIL 11, 2024

      This appeal comes to us on remand from our Supreme Court.              See

Vinculum, Inc. v. Goli Techs., LLC, 310 A.3d 231 (Pa. 2024). While the

Court agreed with our decision as to another issue for which it granted review,

it reversed the majority decision of this Court as to the trial court’s failure to
J-A15035-21

award attorney fees to Vinculum pursuant to the parties’ contract.1 Id. (Slip

Op. at 36-37). In pertinent part, our High Court directed as follows:

             We reverse the Superior Court’s decision affirming the trial
       court’s denial of attorney fees and remand to the Superior Court
       with instructions to vacate the trial court’s judgment and remand
       to the trial court for the trial court to hold a hearing solely on the
       issue of attorney fees. At the hearing, the trial court should
       provide Vinculum with the opportunity to introduce evidence of
       the attorney fees that it incurred as a consequence of Goli LLC’s
       breach of the Consulting Agreement. If the evidence is properly
       admitted over any objections that Goli LLC may make, the trial
       court may consider the reasonableness of the attorney fees in light
       of the specific facts of the case and render some award in
       Vinculum’s favor.

Id.

       Accordingly, we hereby vacate the September 22, 2020 judgment and

remand for the trial court to conduct a hearing on the issue of attorney fees

in a manner consistent with our Supreme Court’s instructions.

       Judgment vacated.         Case remanded with instructions.      Jurisdiction

relinquished.

       Judge Musmanno did not participate in the post-remand consideration

or decision of this case.

____________________________________________

1 See Vinculum, Inc. v. Goli Techs., LLC, 268 A.3d 456, 2021 WL 5575829,

at *5 (Pa.Super. 2021) (non-precedential decision) (affirming, inter alia, the
trial court’s decision not to award attorney fees). But see id. at *11-14
(Bowes, J., dissenting) (opining that the parties’ contract entitled Vinculum to
reasonable attorney fees).

                                           -2-
J-A15035-21

Date: 4/11/2024

                  -3-