A lawsuit filed in Los Angeles, California by Springfield Clinic LLP asserted that Primex Clinical Laboratories Inc. lapsed on its promise to provide 1 million 3M-brand N95 masks to the practice, despite the parties’ binding agreement. Wednesday’s complaint is set against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, which allegedly prompted Springfield to purchase personal protective equipment (PPE), including masks, to protect its staff and patients while continuing to provide care.
Springfield is an Illinois-based “multi-specialty physician practice with medical offices throughout central Illinois that has been providing health care to the people in its community since the 1940s.” According to the complaint, Primex is a clinical laboratory based in Van Nuys, California that has supply chain access to PPE, namely 3M equipment.
Around April 2020, Springfield allegedly contracted with Primex for the delivery of 3M masks and memorialized the deal in a product supply agreement (PSA). According to the complaint, if Primex accepted the order and full advance payment was received, Primex was bound under the PSA.
After the parties signed the PSA, Springfield placed its order and subsequently wired the approximately $1.8 million to Primex, which confirmed receipt of the payment on May 2, 2020. According to the filing, seven months later, a shipment of 1,280 3M masks arrived at Springfield’s clinic from Primex.
On Dec. 22, 2020, Primex allegedly told Springfield that it would be unable to fulfill the remainder of the order, and instead offered to send a different brand of masks that it deemed a brand equivalent. The plaintiff claimed it declined the substitute product, and instead asked for a refund. For the next two months, Springfield alleged that it repeatedly contacted Primex regarding the anticipated refund, but did not receive it.
According to the complaint, Springfield has neither received the remaining 998,720 masks it ordered and paid for, nor a refund of the nearly $1.8 million it paid Primex. The lawsuit brought breach of contract and several alternative claims ultimately seeking judgment against Primex for the amount paid less the cost of the 1,280 masks that were provided. The plaintiff also seeks prejudgment interest and its attorneys’ fees and costs.
Springfield is represented by Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP.
