Ellington Credit Fund, Ltd. v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
837 F. Supp. 2d 162 | District Court, S.D. New York | 2011
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
Hedge funds invested in mortgage-backed securities sued the servicer for mismanagement and breach of contract. The court dismissed most claims because the investors lacked legal standing to sue for problems that occurred before they bought in, and they failed to follow the contract's required dispute procedures before filing suit. This case shows that contract terms controlling who can sue and what steps must be taken first are enforceable and will block lawsuits that skip those steps.
Key Takeaways
- •Always follow the exact dispute resolution steps in your contract before suing—skipping required notices or procedures will get your case thrown out
- •Check whether you have legal standing to sue for the specific harm you're claiming; you may not be able to sue for problems that happened before you became involved
- •No-action clauses and dispute prerequisites in contracts are binding and courts will enforce them strictly—read and comply with them before taking legal action
No owner shall have any right to institute any proceeding unless prerequisites satisfied.
Frequently Asked Question
What happens if I skip the dispute resolution steps in my contract and go straight to court?
The court will likely dismiss your case. Contracts often require you to follow specific procedures—like sending notices or attempting negotiation—before filing a lawsuit. If you skip these steps, the defendant can ask the judge to throw out your case, and courts regularly grant those requests. Always follow your contract's dispute process exactly.
Related Cases
Atlantic Marine Constr. Co. v. United States Dist. Court for Western Dist. of Tex.
Forum-selection clauses in federal contracts are enforced through §1404(a) transfer motions, not §1406(a) dismissals, and must be given controlling weight except in exceptional circumstances.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission v. IT-Davy
Sovereign immunity bars a contractor's breach-of-contract suit against a state agency absent express legislative consent; neither the agency's conduct, contract terms, nor general statutes waive immunity from suit.
Martin K. Eby Construction Company, Inc. v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit
A contractor must exhaust administrative remedies established by a regional transportation authority before pursuing breach of contract claims in court, even when the authority lacks governmental immunity from suit.
General Services Commission v. Little-Tex Insulation Co.
The State does not waive sovereign immunity from breach-of-contract suits by accepting contract benefits; Chapter 2260's administrative procedure is the exclusive remedy for such claims.
Green International, Inc. v. Solis
No-damages-for-delay clauses in construction contracts need not meet the conspicuousness requirement established in Dresser for exculpatory negligence clauses, and such clauses are enforceable to bar delay damages absent specific exceptions.
Moncharsh v. Heily & Blase
An arbitrator's decision is generally not reviewable for errors of fact or law, with limited exceptions for fraud, corruption, exceeding powers, or procedural unfairness.