Spilman recently had an important summary judgment win in a class action. The case involved our client's attempt to collect on debt it had purchased and the question of whether it fell within the applicable statute of limitations for the sale of goods under the UCC. In our Motion for Summary Judgment, we argued the ten-year statute of limitations for written contracts applies rather than the four-year UCC statute of limitations because the contracts at issue were contracts for services rather than contracts for goods and therefore the debt was not time-barred. Alternatively, we argued that if the Court found the contracts to be mixed, or hybrid, contracts the predominant purpose test weighs in favor of the Defendant in that the contracts were predominantly for phone services with the cell phones (the alleged sale of goods) received by the Plaintiffs only incidentally involved, thereby making the ten-year statute of limitations applicable and accordingly the defaulted debt enforceable. The Court found that the contracts at issue were for the rendition of services governed by the ten-year statute of limitations and the debts were not time barred and granted the motion for summary judgment. The matter was dismissed with prejudice.

Disclaimer