- 6 -
of the agreement and, in August 1990, sent RTA a notice of
default, asserting that the agreement was canceled. RTA
reciprocated by sending EDS its own notice of default, asserting
that (1) EDS had failed to provide the technical reports and
information concerning the TTS that were necessary to obtain the
FDER permit and (2) RTA intended to hold EDS and its officers
responsible for this and other alleged breaches of the agreement.
At that time, RTA had paid in excess of $1.6 million towards the
development of the TTS, the TTS was approximately 55 percent
complete, and the underlying TTS technology remained unproven.
Initial attempts at salvaging the business relationship
between RTA and EDS failed, and, in September 1990, RTA filed a
complaint (the complaint) in a lawsuit (the lawsuit) against EDS
and its principal shareholders in the Circuit Court of the Ninth
Judicial Circuit, in and for Orange County, Florida (the Circuit
Court). The complaint contains three counts. The first count
relates to the TTS and alleges breach of contract. Among the
remedies sought are (1) specific performance of the agreement by
EDS, (2) delivery of the TTS, (3) damages, and (4) injunctive
relief against EDS selling or using the TTS. Alternatively, the
complaint asks for a return of moneys paid to EDS and damages.
The second count relates to the marketing rights; it alleges
breach of contact and asks for injunctive relief. The third
count relates to certain medical technology, alleges breach of
contract, and asks for injunctive relief. EDS answered the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011