WPCX s:&py*')~CJ7~d͛6bߧ|#q[Â!yiDQ)FOwwI+S#iP=!x23U"'bU o ۬<_a@q `-wE֐bzAxճ]rP6g i$J-NEݩtc~*D/kiX%]ު$ۦCT}Et^DhjCeկda(h8| po vΒ͜ xv#@HVI&V@x6LH^ߌzlMEer 6Ӻg%tUowP=UL?c8B#]` &@amivgÌ^sJL^I< x#>x(!j0<3Bi1E/racK-4d>N|\XDaMEMUB6nx %' - 0 0e 01l 0tSU: 0{ 0A 0 0=C D+ AQ 0CZ Dc""""##f#a# B1# $~'f*a*f/*a1*fE*aG*6[*",",,R,"9-F[-f.a.~."5/W/5o/1"2"2=3%D6i:<?EI3 M4=P 0qU?V 0fOV#V(vXNX^ XwX4XX mX\  `*Times New RomanTT\  `*Times New RomanTTC\  P6QP\  `*Times New RomanTTXXP\  P6QXP\  `*Times New RomanTTW\  P6QP<6X9`("Courier NewTTTT6X@DQ@<6X9`("Courier NewTTTTXXx6X@DQX@\  `*Times New RomanTT&&J\  P6Q&P\  `*Times New RomanTT<\  P6QP'  PHOENIX SERVICES 2 thomast0thomast .   @! 0Level 3Level 3            @! 0Level 1Level 1            `:footnote reffootnote referenceXXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTWh:Default ParaDefault Paragraph FontXXXW\  `*Times New RomanTTW        W\  `*Times New RomanTTW<6X9`("Courier NewTT     )UgUgUg  ?UgUg?WGCz h x p @X@Exxxxx (#(#  (#(#?UgUg?(Y2$ D&!UgUgUg  ݃ Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(Y2$ D&!UgUgUg  (Y2$ D&!UgUgUg  ($    'dxd C<< c "UgUgUg    ?Ug@    2  A  ($     P D&!UgUgUg  XXUgXXXXXXXX          1  xD    XXXXXXXX  AtthetimeoftheAgreement,theentitywasstillWMA,andtherefore,thisOpinion  referstoPhoenixasWMAwhenquotingfromtheAgreement.UgXX : D&!UgUgUg  XXUgXXXXXXXX          2  xD    XXXXXXXX  Unsegregatedwasteincludesbothmedicalwasteandgeneralwaste.Unsegregatedwaste  mustbetreatedasmedicalwaste.UgXX  D&!UgUgUg  XXUgXXXXXXXX          3  xD    XXXXXXXX  AlthoughtheoriginalWasteSupplyAgreementhadnoprovisionforsuspension,  conditionsweresobadthatJHHdeterminedthatithadtosuspendsupplyingwastetoMWAfor x healthandsafetyreasons.MWAdidnotchallengethelegalityofthatsuspension.UgXX         e   w     D&!UgUgUg  XXUgXXXXXXXX          4  xD    XXXXXXXX  PhoenixfurtherstatesthatitfiledSupplementalAnswerstoInterrogatoriesamonth w beforetrialstatingthatitdidnotmissthreepickupsonJanuary14thandhighlightedthisposition ? initsSupplementalPretrialMemorandum.Phoenixalsoreliesuponthemanifestsandthescale  ticketstoshowthatitdidnotmissthepickupsthatday,butthemeaningofthosedocumentsisa X factualmatteraddressedlaterinthisOpinion.UgXX  w   SDU_36Table_A d  D&!UgUgUg  XXUgB.` hp x (#XBXXXXXXXX          5  D    XXXXXXXX  TheMajorBackupprovisionalsoappliestoMissedPickupsbecausebythetermsofthe w AgreementSanctionsapplytoMissedPickups.ItalsoappliesbecausewheneverPhoenixmissed ? apickupitalsofailedtomakea XRXXXAXXX XRCompleteScheduledPickup. XRXXX@ CX XRUg C t D&!UgUgUg  XXUgB.` hp x (#XBXXXXXXXX          6  D    XXXXXXXX  TheTransportationLogsforJanuary14th,January15thandJanuary16thareinAppendix w A.UgXXTable_BTable_CTable_D , D&!UgUgUg  XXUgB.` hp x (#XBXXXXXXXX          7  D    XXXXXXXX  Becauseofroundingthenumberonthechartis528,not529UgXX         9 StarPageciteas__Cite_as__269_Md__569___576___307    e  <  )UgUgUg  ?UgXB.` hp x (#XBT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTUg?Table_E t    \R3'* \      5 +  )UgUgUg  ?UgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTUg?6WGCz h x p @X@Exxxxx (#(#  (#(#?UgUg?  "UgUgUg  T@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XT  ?Ug@    29  A      e       3 D&!UgUgUg  XXUgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTXXXXXXXX          8  D    XXXXXXXX  Thus,theCertificateissuedexplicitlystatesthat XRXXXAXXX XRtheIndependentEngineerdoesnot  takeapositiononthevalidityoftheNOSissuedbytheWasteSupplier. XRXXX@ CX XRUg C  D&!UgUgUg  XXUgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTXXXXXXXX          9  D    XXXXXXXX  Additionally,whenreplacingthecartdesign,MWAcouldrequestthat XRXXXAXXX XRtheIndependent  Engineercertifiesthatthe[new]design...isreasonable... XRXXX@XXX XRԀUnliketheothercitedprovisions,  inthisinstancetheIndependentEngineer XRXXX=XXX XRsinvolvementisdeterminedsolelyatthediscretionof T MWA.UgXX u D&!UgUgUg  XXUgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTXXXXXXXX          10  D    XXXXXXXX  TheletterissignedR.W.BeckandAssociatesandtheCertificateissignedR.W.Beck,  Inc.UgXX  D&!UgUgUg  XXUgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTXXXXXXXX          11  D    XXXXXXXX  SimilarlythisCourtisresponsibleforanydecisionitissuesregardlessofhowmuchof  theactualworkwasdonebytheJudge XRXXX=XXX XRslawclerkorsecretary.UgXX  D&!UgUgUg  XXUgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTXXXXXXXX          12  D    XXXXXXXX  TheCourtdoesnotfocusontheassumptionthattherewillnota XRXXXAXXX XRforcemajeure. XRXXX@XXX XRԀ  Article1.15oftheAgreementdefinesForceMajeureas XRXXXAXXX XR[a]nActofGod,actofapublicenemy,  naturaldisasterorcondition,fireorothercausenotwithinthecontrolofthepartyclaimingthat T itsperformanceshouldbeexcusedbyreasonthereof.... XRXXX@XXX XRԀThus,thisassumptionissimplya l recognitionoftheuncertaintyoflife,similartotheassumptionthatmostpeoplemakethatwhen > theygotobedatnight,thattheywillwakeupthenextmorning.Bydefinition,aforcemajeure  eventisaneventunlikelytooccur.UgXX  D&!UgUgUg  XXUgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTXXXXXXXX           13  D    XXXXXXXX  TheCourtgrantedJHH XRXXX=XXX XRsMotioninLimineexcludingevidenceofhowPhoenixpicked  upJHH XRXXX=XXX XRstrashaftertheNoticeofTerminationwasissued,becausethedeterminationofwhether  theCertificateprovidesreasonableassurancemustbemadeonthefaceoftheCertificate.UgXX { D&!UgUgUg  XXUgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTXXXXXXXX          14  D    XXXXXXXX  BecausetheCourtfindsthatJHH XRXXX=XXX XRsmotiveinterminatingtheAgreementisirrelevant,  the XRXXXAXXX XRfacts XRXXX@XXX XRԀdiscussedinthissectionoftheOpinionareallegations,notfindings.UgXX ) D&!UgUgUg  XXUgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTXXXXXXXX          15  D    XXXXXXXX  PhoenixalsostatesthatthefactthattheNoticeofSuspensionwaspreparedandreadyto  besentoutbeforetheNoticeofMajorBackupwentout,isevidenceofbadfaith.Thatisnotbad x D faith,thatispreparation.?XXԀUg? * D&!UgUgUg  XXUgT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XTXXXXXXXX          16  D    XXXXXXXX  ThisistheUnitedStateswheregrossnationalproductismeasuredindollarsandcents,  incontrasttotheKingdomofBhutanwhichmeasuresgrossnationalhappiness.(HisMajesty x KingJigmeSingyeWangchuckproclaimedthat XRXXXAXXX XRgrossnationalhappinessismoreimportant @ thangrossnationalproduct XRXXX@XXX XRԀbecause XRXXXAXXX XRhappinesstakesprecedenceovereconomicprosperityin b ournationaldevelopmentprocess. XRXXX@XXX XR).http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/bhutan/gnh.html 4 UgXX(2$ D&!UgUgUg  XUg  0  3|x (>&$UgUgUgHP LaserJet 5M,,,,0!x'1 aa0*U D&!UgUgUg  _f?Ug  PHOENIXSERVICES   h   *  INTHE  LIMITEDPARTNERSHIP r    `     h   *  CIRCUITCOURT 4    ` Plaintiff F    `     h   *  FOR    vs. z 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#*  BALTIMORECITY< (#(# JOHNSHOPKINSHOSPITAL  N    `     h   *  CaseNo.:24C0301663      ` Defendant   h      p            `     h   * D      `  *  * h *  *  * p *  *    @! MEMORANDUMOPINION    f  Thestakesareveryhighforbothpartiesinthismatter.PhoenixServicesLimited ^  Partnership( ?A? Phoenix ?@? )collectsanddisposesmedicalwastefromJohnsHopkins   Hospital( ?A? JHH ?@? )andotherareahospitals,physiciansandmedicalinstitutionsinthe ,| BaltimoreWashingtonarea.TherelationshipbetweenJHHandPhoenixisgovernedbya  WasteSupplyAgreementdatedNovember16,1989andFirstAmendmentdated J November15,1994(referredtocollectivelyas ?A? theAgreement ?@? ).TheAgreementsets  forththeconditionsunderwhichJHHcansuspendor,eventuallyterminatethecontract. h Insummary,ifJHHgivesPhoenixnoticethatthereisa ?A? MajorBackup ?@? Ԁasdefinedby < theAgreement,PhoenixmustarriveatJHHwithinthreehourswithsufficienttractors,  trailers,equipmentandpersonneltocleanitup.IfPhoenixdoesnot,JHHmayissuea  Z! NoticeofSuspensionandPhoenixthenhasamaximumof30daystoprovideJHHwitha # certificatefrom ?A? theIndependentEngineerstatingthat[it]hasmadechanges... !b% sufficienttoprevent[a]recurrence. ?@? ԀIfitdoesnotprovidesuchacertificate,JHHmay "' terminatetheAgreementwithoutpenalty. F$)    Around4:00p.m.onJanuary15,2003,JHHissuedaNoticeofMajorBackupand %!+ onthenextday,January16th,issuedaNoticeofSuspension.OnFebruary14,2003, N'"- PhoenixprovidedJHHwithaCertificatefromtheIndependentEngineer;however,on ("$/ February25,2003,JHHgavePhoenixaNoticeofTerminationoftheAgreementstating V*%1 thattheCertificateprovidedbytheIndependentEngineerdidnotprovidetherequired +*'3 reasonableassurance.Phoenixfiledthisdeclaratoryactionseekingadeclarationthat:(1) ^-(5         therewasnobasisforaNoticeofMajorBackup;(2)iftherewas,JHHdidnotprovide  NoticeinaccordancewiththeAgreement;(3)inanyevent,Phoenixremediedthebackup 4 asrequiredbytheAgreement,andtherefore,therewasnobasisforJHHtoissueaNotice  ofSuspension;(4)JHHfailedtoproperlyservetheNoticeofSuspension;and(5)JHH <  wasnotauthorizedtorejecttheIndependentEngineer ?=? sCertificateandthuscouldnot   terminatethecontractwithoutpayingapenalty.JHHfiledacounterclaimseekingthe Z   mirroroppositedeclarations.  .    JHHprovides24%ofthetotalwastestreamcomingtoPhoenixandifPhoenix b  doesnotcollectmedicalwastefromJHH,itwillcollapseandtheotherparticipating 6  hospitals,physiciansandinstitutionswouldhavetofindanalternativewastedisposal j  system.IfJHHwasnotauthorizedtoterminatethecontractforcause,itmustcontinue > withthecontractaswrittenorpayasmuchas$5milliontobuyoutitsobligationsunder r theAgreement. F   ThecasewastriedtotheCourtover7days,andthepartiessubmittedPostTrial z Memoranda. N @pp" FindingsofFacts     MedicalWasteAssociatesLimitedPartnership( ?A? MWA ?@? ),Phoenix ?=? s V  predecessor,XX?XXXX         1      ?XXԀdesignedandconstructedamedicalwastefacility(the ?A? Facility ?@? )in " HawkinsPointwithtwolargeincineratorsandcreatedasystemforcollectionand : $ transportationofunsegregatedXX?XXXX          2      ?XXԀmedicalandgeneralwastefromhospitalstotheFacility !& (the ?A? TransportationSystem ?@? ).Theprojectwasfinancedbyindustrialrevenuebonds, B#( andMWAenteredintolongtermagreementswiththefoundinghospitals,includingJHH,  toensurethatitwouldhavesufficientrevenuetoservicethedebt.Eachofthefounding 4 hospitalsguaranteedthatitwouldpayfortheprocessingofaspecifiedminimumtonnage  ofwasteforatwentyyearperiod.Beforetheendofthetwentyyearperiod,afounding <  hospitalwouldhavetomakeasubstantialpaymenttobuyouttheAgreement.     MWAwaspoorlymanaged,andin1994,afteronlythreeyears,JHHsuspended D   deliveriesofwastetoPhoenix.XX?XXXX         3      ?XXԀMWAsoughttoraisecapitaltoimprovetheFacilityand    theTransportationSystem.GrotechCapitalGroup,aventurecapitalfirm,agreedto L  investsufficientfundstoimprovetheFacilityandTransportationSystem,contingent   upontheexecutionoftheFirstAmendment.TheFirstAmendmentincludedtermsfor T  SanctionsandSuspensionthatwerenotintheoriginalWasteSupplyAgreement. ( SimultaneouswiththesigningoftheFirstAmendment,MWAfiledabankruptcypetition \ andsubmittedasubsequentlyapprovedPlanofReorganizationthatincludedMWA 0 changingitsnametoPhoenix. d   In1996,afterreceivingacertificationfromtheIndependentEngineerasrequired 8 bytheAgreement,JHHendedthesuspensionandresumedsupplyingwastetoPhoenix. l ThepartiesdisagreevehementlyaboutthehistoryofPhoenix ?=? sperformancesince1996, @  butthisCourtfindsitunnecessarytomakefactualfindingsaboutthathistory.Factual " findingsonthekeyeventsinvolvedinthislitigationaremadethroughouttheOpinion.  ^$ @ww# FirstAmendment  !&   ThekeytermsoftheFirstAmendmentaresummarizedandsetouthere.TheFirst #f( AmendmentpermitsJHHtoinitiateasuspensionperiodaftercertainconditionsaremet. $* ThefirstconditionisthatPhoenixfailstomakespecified ?A? CompleteScheduled  Pickups. ?@? ԀThesecondisthatthefailurecausesatleast50cartsofwastetobebackedup J atJHH.ThethirdisthatJHHgivesPhoenixawrittenNoticeofMajorBackup.The 4 fourthisthatPhoenixthenfailstofulfillcertainconditionswithinthreehoursofthe h  notice.Finally,JHHmustgivePhoenixNoticeofSuspension.  <   AftertheNoticeofSuspensionisissued,theSuspensioncontinuesuntilJHH p    ?A? receivesreasonableassurancesintheformofacertificateoftheIndependentEngineer  D  statingthatMWAhasmadechangestotheTransportationSystemortheFacility   sufficienttopreventtherecurrenceofafailuretocomplywiththeagreeduponschedule b  ofpickups. ?@? Ԁ(Emphasisadded.)FailureofPhoenixto ?A? providesuchcertifiedassurance.   ..shallconstituteaneventofDefault.... ?@? Ԁ 0  f8  8`   8 ` x` x ` (1) [I]fatanytime...   8  8`   0 ` x` x ` (A) MWAfailstomake'w x x 8  8`   (i)threeCompleteScheduledPickups(forpurposesofthis  Section,aCompleteScheduledPickupshallmeanthearrival F ofanemptytrailerwiththecapacitytohaul48carts,as X describedonExhibitIhereto)forwhichSanctionsare  applicableunderExhibitGwithinaoneweekperiodor` x` x 8  8`   (ii)threeCompleteScheduledPickupswithinadayforwhich 9  SanctionsareapplicableunderExhibitG,and    !` x` x  ''f8  8`   (B) thefailurecausesmorethan50cartsofwastetobe X# backedupattheWasteSupplier ?=? sfacilities,and0$` x` x 8  8`   (C) theWasteSuppliergivesMWAawrittennoticeof q!& causeforsuspension(whichmaybebyfacsimile)statingthat, I"' atthetimeofthenotice,thepickupshavenotbeenmadeand !#q( MWA ?=? sfailuretoremedythesituationwillresultin #I) suspension(theconcurrenceofevents(A),(B)shall $- * collectivelyconstitutea ?A? MajorBackup ?@? ),and%!+` x` x 8  8`   (D) withinthreehoursafterreceiptofthenotice,MWA F'"- hasnotarrivedattheWasteSupplier ?=? sloadingfacilitieswith (n#. sufficienttractors,trailers,equipment,andpersonneltoeffect )R$/ thepromptremovalofallwastethatwastohavebeen  removedbythemissedorpartialpickups,theWasteSupplier  may,bytheissuanceofanoticeofsuspensionnotlaterthan ` 30hoursaftertheMajorBackup,causetheinitiationofa 8 suspensionperiod.Thesuspensionperiodshallcontinueuntil ` theWasteSupplierreceivesreasonableassurancesinthe 8 formofacertificateoftheIndependentEngineerstatingthat   MWAhasmadechangestotheTransportationSystemorthe   Facilitysufficienttopreventtherecurrenceofafailureto p  complywiththeagreeduponscheduleofpickups.The H   failureofMWAtoprovidesuchcertifiedassurancewithinthe  p  soonerof(i)30days(orsuchlongerperiodnottoexceed60  H  days,astheIndependentEngineercertifiestobeneededto   implementthecorrectivechangeswithduediligence)from   thenoticeor(ii)thedateagreedtobybothpartiesshall   constituteaneventofDefaultundertheWasteSupply X  Agreementwhich,notwithstandinganyotherprovision 0  (including,withoutlimitation,Section14.1)oftheWaste X SupplyAgreementtothecontrary,shallgiveWasteSupplier 0 theoptionofterminatingtheWasteSupplyAgreement  withoutpenaltyuponnoticegivenduringthesuspension  period.h` x` x  '8   I.  BurdenofProof =     CitingUnitedStatesv.Franze,686F.2d1238,1248(7thCir.1982),JHHarguesit q doesnothavetheburdenofproofbecausePhoenixputonitsevidencefirstanddidnot E pointoutduringthetrialthatJHHhastheburdenofproof.ThisCourtdisagrees.JHH y hastheburdenofprovingthatPhoenixbreachedthecontractandthatitwasjustifiedin M terminatingthecontractforcause. In TricatIndustries,Inc.v.Harper, 131Md.App. ! 89(2000), theCourt heldthatthejurywasproperlyinstructedthattheburdenofproof  !Y# wasontheemployertoshowthathehadterminatedanemployeeforcause.XX? "% 8  8`   ?XX Thecircuitcourtinstructedthejurythattheburdenof $e' provingthatappelleehadbeenterminatedforcausewas $= ( onappellants.Appellantsassertthatthisimproperly %!) shiftedtheburdenofproofandexplainthattheexistence &!* ofcausewasnotanaffirmativedefense,ascharacterized u'"+ bythecourt,butwasareasonwhyappellantswerenot M(#, liableforbreachofcontract.WeperceivenoerrorXX?.UgXX %)u$-` x` x     ?UgId.at119.Seealso ContractsMaterialsProcessing,Inc.v.KataleunaGmbH  Catalysts,164F.Supp.2d520,536(D.Md.2001)(citationsomitted)(holdingthatin 8 Marylandthepartydefendingtheterminationofacontracthastheburdenof   provingthattheotherpartybreachedthecontract) ;Foster-PorterEnters.v.De @  Mare,198Md.20,29(1951)(manufacturerwhodefendedterminationofagreement   basedonallegedbreachhadtheburdenofprovingabreachsufficienttojustify L   termination).     Thus,theburdenwasonJHHtoprovethat:(1)therewasaMajorBackupon T  January15,2003;(2)Phoenixfailedtobringsufficientpersonnelandequipmenttocure (  theMajorBackupwithintherequiredthreehours;and(3)itsrejectionoftheIndependent \  Engineer ?=? sCertificatewasvalidbecausetheCertificatefailedtoprovidereasonable 0 assurancethatithadmadechangessufficienttopreventarecurrence. z           0   2.  TheLanguageintheAgreementN(#(# 0   1.  (#(# CG           Ininterpretingawrittencontract,theCourtmustfirstexaminethelanguage,andif V itis ?A? plainandunambiguous,...[thenthe]courtmustpresumethatthepartiesmeant  whattheyexpressed. ?@? ԀTaylorv.NationsBank,365Md.166,179(2001).Thusthetest $t   ?A? isnotwhatthepartiestothecontractintendedittomean,butwhatareasonableperson " inthepositionofthepartieswouldhavethoughtitmeant. ?@? ԀId.SeealsoLangstonv. X $ Langston,784A.2d1086,1095(2001)( ?A? [I]fawrittencontractissusceptibleofaclear, !B& unambiguousanddefiniteunderstanding,itsconstructionisforthecourttodetermine.); ?@? Ԁ #( Dep ?=? t.ofEconomicandCommunityDevelopmentv.Attman/GlazerP.B.Co.,323Md. &%v * 592,605(1991)( ?A? Testofambiguityofcontractiswhether,consideringcharacterof &", contract,itspurpose,andfactsandcircumstancesofpartiesattimeofexecution, Z(#. languageusedinthecontract,whenreadbyreasonablyprudentperson,issusceptibleto ).%0  e   morethanonemeaning. ?@? )    TheAgreementisclearandunambiguous,therefore,theCourtdoesnotrelyon J anyoftheextrinsicevidenceconcerningtheparties ?=? Ԁintent.  8   III.  TheSuspension h    0  0` (#(#  A. ` MajorBackup <` (#` (# f8  8`   0 ` x` x ` 1. Phoenix ?=? sMotiontoConformItsAnswerto p   theCounterclaimtotheEvidenceatTrial >   x x f  JHHarguesthatthisCourtneednotdecideiftherewasaMajorBackupbecause   PhoenixadmittedinitspleadingsandinotherdocumentsthattherewasaMajorBackup. F  Phoenixdisagrees,butinanyevent,movedtoamenditsanswertoconformtothe   evidence.JHHvehementlyobjectstotheamendmentbecausethemotionwasmadesix N weeksaftertheconclusionofthetrialandtwoweeksafterthepartiesfiledposttrial " briefs. V   InsupportofitsargumentthatPhoenixadmittedtoaMajorBackupinits * pleadings,JHHbeginswithPhoenix ?=? sAmendedComplaintwhichstates: ^ f8  8`   OnJanuary15,2003,at3:37p.m.,JHHfaxedtoPhoenix H writtennoticeofcauseforsuspensionofthecontractpursuant   totheFirstAmendmenttotheAgreement.***Pursuanttothe | termsoftheAgreement,Phoenixwasrequiredwithin3hours >  tobringsufficientpersonnelandequipmenttotheHospitalto P! affectthepromptremovalofanywaste."` x` x f(Emphasisadded.)JHHarguesthatthehighlightedlanguageisanadmissionthatthere F $ wasaMajorBackup.ThisCourtdisagrees.Thatlanguageissimplyanacknowledgment !& thatuponreceiptoftheNotice,underthetermsoftheAgreement,Phoenixwasrequired N#( totakecertainactions. $" *   JHHnextpointstoPhoenix ?=? sresponsetoJHHallegationsinParagraph62ofits V&!, AnswertoAmendedComplaintandCounterclaimforDeclaratoryJudgment.JHH '@#. alleged: t)$0  we   f8  8`   ByJanuary14,theissuehadnotbeenresolved.Phoenix w missedscheduledpickupsat4:00p.m.,8:00p.m.and10:45 9 p.m.,....Thethreemissedpickupscombinedwiththe  substantialaccumulationofwasteconstitutedaMajorBackup F undertheAmendment.` x` x Initsanswertothatparagraph,Phoenixstated:   8  8`   PhoenixdeniestheallegationsofParagraph62,exceptas   specificallyadmittedherein.***Phoenixdeniesthelast I   sentenceofParagraph62asitistheconclusionoflaw.    Phoenixadmitsthatthescheduledpickupsat4:00p.m.,8:00  V  p.m.,and10:45p.m.onJanuary14werenotmade.  ` x` x f(Emphasisadded.)Phoenixstatesthatthehighlightedlanguageisonlyanadmissionthat   the ?A? specificpickupswerenotmade,pertheschedule, ?@? Ԁnotanadmissionthattheevents   constitutedaMajorBackup.XX?XXXX         4      ?XXԀPhoenixmovestoamenditsAnswertoParagraph62to 1  read: > f8  8`   Phoenixadmitsthatthescheduledpickupsat4:00p.m.,8:00 9 p.m.,and10:45p.m.onJanuary14werenotmadeatthe  timessetoutintheschedule;however,Phoenixmissedatotal F ofonlytwopickupsonJanuary14,underthetermsofthe  FirstAmendment.A` x` x f  TheCourtwilldenyPhoenix ?=? srequesttoamendParagraph62toconformtothe N evidence.WhileRule2341contemplatesthatamendmentswillbeliberallygranted,this _ CourtfindsthatitwouldbeprejudicialtoJHHtopermitanamendmentonahotly l  contestedfactafteralltheevidenceisinandthepartieshavefiledextensivePostTrial g" Memoranda.See MattvidiAssociatesLtd.Partnershipv.NationsBankofVirginia,N.A. t$ 100Md.App.71,83(1994) ( ?A?  Amendmentsareto  ?>?  befreelyallowedwhenjusticeso s!& permits,  ?=?  Md.Rule2341(c),XX?Ԁ?XXandtobedeniedonlyif  ?>?  prejudicetotheopposing #( partyorunduedelayresults.  ?=@?  (citing  Robertsonv.Davis,271Md.708,710(1974)).XX?Ԁ $6 *   ww   ?XXHoweverXX?, ?XXtheCourtfindsthatPhoenixhasonlyadmittedthatthespecifiedpickupswere w notmade.ItsresponsetoParagraph15isnotanadmissionthattherewasaMajor  Backup.     Incontrast,theCourtwillpermitanamendmenttoParagraph63evenatthislate   hour.JHHarguesthatPhoenix ?=? sresponsetoParagraph63isanadmissionthatithad   receivedthelettergivingnoticeoftheMajorBackupat3:22p.m.Inresponseto %   paragraph63,Phoenixstatedthatit ?A? admitsreceiptofthereferencedletter...andstates  2  thattheletterisadocumentwithindependentlegalsignificance,whichspeaksforitself. ?@? Ԁ C  Alloftheevidenceattrial,includingthatfromJHH ?=? sinternaldocuments,clearlyshows f  thatthe3:22p.m.timewasanerror.Therefore,theamendmentwillbepermittedasit w doesnotprejudiceJHH.    Finally,JHHpointstoPhoenix ?=? sresponsetoparagraph64whereit ?A? denie[d]that  itdidnotmeetitsobligationwithsufficientequipmentandpersonneltoremovetheMajor  Backupwithinthreehours. ?@? ԀThereferencedstatementinresponseparagraph64follows & a 7   D detaileddescriptionofPhoenix ?=? sviewofwhatoccurredthatdayandcannotunderany w circumstancesbeproperlycharacterizedasanadmission.  f8  8`   0 ` x` x ` 2.  ?A? CompleteScheduledPickups ?@?   x x f  ThefirstquestionthatmustbeaddressedtodetermineiftherewasaMajorBackup %  iswhethertherewasafailuretomakepickupsasdefinedbytheAgreement.Specifically,  2 theevidencemustshowthatPhoenixfailedtomake: -   f   `  (i)threeCompleteScheduledPickups(forpurposesofthis  :     ` Section,aCompleteScheduledPickupshallmeanthearrivalofan s     ` emptytrailerwiththecapacitytohaul48carts,asdescribedon 5     ` ExhibitIhereto)forwhichSanctionsareapplicableunderExhibit      ` Gwithinaoneweekperiodor B     `  (ii)threeCompleteScheduledPickupswithinadayfor =  f   ` whichSanctionsareapplicableunderExhibitG  JHHarguesthat,asstatedinthelettergivingNoticeofMajorBackup,Phoenixfailedto   makefivescheduledpickups:the4:00p.m.,8:00p.m.,and10:45p.m.pickupsonJanuary  14thandthe7:00a.m.and12:30p.m.pickupsonJanuary15th.Phoenixarguesthatnone  ofthosepickupswas ?A? missed. ?@?     JHHarguesthata ?A? CompleteScheduledPickup ?@? Ԁmeans ?A? thearrivalofanempty 2 trailerwiththecapacitytohaul48carts,asdescribedonExhibitI..., ?@? Ԁandthatthe C pickups,mustbepickupsforwhich ?A? SanctionsareapplicableunderExhibitG. ?@? ԀExhibit f! Gprovidesforsanctionsforlatepickupsanddefineswhenapickupislate. w# f8  8`   Sanctions.Theapplicablesanctions(the ?A? Sanctions ?@? )for  % latepickupsarecalculatedasfollows: !Q&` x` x * ` ddd Xdd Xdd X(#(#,S @,@, @+  6 'ww C6@ Numberof I @ MinutesLate(1)   f 160 V Ѐ61ormore ; ,!.C  C; ? ,!C  C?& N  f@55-&TotalAmountof I @..0&Sanction(2)    f 8 $50.00 P ?'V C    CP = ,! C  C=Ѐπππ ? ,! & C  C?0 8 08m8mA75mmC     A' 0fB.` hp x (#XB8  8`   8 ` x` x ` (1) Latenesswillbemeasuredbythenumberof   minutesbeyondtheendoftheallowablepickup G  window.[BecauseJHH]receive[d]5ormore    pickupsdailythewindow...end[ed]1hour T  afterthescheduleddeliverytime.***    fJHHarguesthatifPhoenixislateenoughinmakingapickupsothatsanctionscould  apply,thanPhoenixhasfailedtomakea ?A? completeschedule[d]pickup[]. ?@? Ԁ    Phoenixontheotherhandarguesthatinorderfortheirtobeafailuretomakea / pickup,thepickupmustbe ?A? missed. ?@? ԀTheAgreementalsoprovidesforSanctionsfor   ?A? missed ?@? Ԁpickupsanddefineshowthenumberof ?A? missedPickups ?@? Ԁistobecalculated: t  f8  8`   MissedPickups.MWAshallpayorcredittotheWaste 0! SupplieranamountequaltotheDisposalFeeforthewaste i" relatingtoeachmissedpickupforwhichaSanctionis +# applicable,evenifsuchwasteiseventuallypickedupby v$ MWA.Forhospitalshaving1ormorescheduledpickupsper 8% day,thenumberofmissedpickupsforadayistheexcess,if q& any,ofthenumberofscheduledpickupsforthedayoverthe 3' numberofactualpickupsforwhichaSanctionisapplicable ~( thatoccurredduringtheday.@)` x` x  f(Emphasisadded.)TheAgreementdefinesadayas ?A? the24hourperiodbeginningat !* 6:00a.m. ?@? Ԁ "7,   RelyingonthetestimonyofRichardMontgomery,ChairmanoftheBoard, H$. PhoenixarguesthatanoperatingweekisMondaythroughSaturdayandthatthe %U!0 AgreementdoesnotprohibitPhoenixfrommakingup,laterinthesameweek,adelivery P'"2 thatwasmissedduringagivenday.Thus,accordingtoPhoenix,apickupthatismadeup (]$4 laterintheweekmaynotbecountedasapickupthatit ?A? fail[ed]tomake. ?@? ԀPhoenix w argues:  f8  8`   theprovisionmeansthatPhoenixhasthechancetomakeup  missedpickupswithintheoperationalweek,solongasit W doesnotmissatotalofthreepickupsormoreoverthecourse   oftheweek,butifitmissesthreeinoneday,...,those  d circumstancesfulfillthe ?A? missedpickup ?@? ԀprongoftheMajor  & Backuptest,nomatterhowmanypickupsPhoenixmakesthe j   restoftheweek.,  ` x` x f  Phoenix ?=? sinterpretationisintriguing,butnotconvincing.AspointedoutbyJHH,  w  theAgreementdoesnotrefertopickups ?A? withinanoperatingweek, ?@? Ԁbuttopickups    ?A? withinaoneweekperiod. ?@? ԀThe ?A? customary,ordinaryandacceptedmeaning, ?@? Ԁof "   ?A? withinaoneweekperiod ?@? Ԁissevenconsecutivedays.See AtlanticContracting& E  MaterialCo.,Inc.v.UlicoCas.Co.,380Md.285,301(Md.2004)(  ?A?  Ourprimary Y consideration,wheninterpretingacontract'sterms,isthe  ?>?  customary,ordinary,  andacceptedmeaning  ?=?  ofthelanguageused.  ?@?  ). Seealso Bealev.AmericanNat.  LawyersIns.Reciprocal379Md.643,660(Md.2004) . 0   PhoenixarguesthatJHHissimplywrongintakingthepositionthat ?A? alatepickup A isthesameasafailuretomakeapickup,withinthemeaningoftheterm ?>? Major R Backup. ?=@? ԀInsupportofthisargument,PhoenixpointsoutthattheAgreementreferstoa u  ?A? failuretomake ?@? Ԁascheduledpickup,nota ?A? failuretobeontime. ?@? ԀPhoenixcontinues: ! f8  8`   Ifmerelatenessconstituteda ?A? failuretomake ?@? Ԁapickup,  # therewouldbenoreasontodefineanoperationalday,orthe  v$ numberofmissedPickupsinaday,asthecontractdoes;nor !8% wouldtherebeascheduleofmonetarysanctionsforpickups q"& thatoccurredmorethan61minutesafterthescheduletime.3#'` x` x fAlthoughtheAgreementdoesreferto ?A? failuretomake ?@? Ԁascheduledpickup,nota $@ )  ?A? failuretobeontime, ?@? Ԁitstatesthattheconcernisafailuretomake ?A? threeComplete Q&!+ ScheduledPickups,...forwhichSanctionsareapplicable. ?@? ԀSanctionsareapplicablefor 't#- missedandforlatepickups: ?A? [t]heapplicablesanctions(the ?A? Sanctions ?@? )forlate w pickupsarecalculated.... ?@? ԀThus,undertheplainlanguageoftheAgreement,alate  pickupisthesameasafailuretomakeapickupundertheMajorBackupprovision. 4 FurthertheAgreementusedtheword ?A? scheduled, ?@? Ԁandapickupthatislate,isnot /   ?A? scheduled. ?@? ԀAsdiscussedbelowatpages2325,thisisoneofmanyoftheinstances  R wheretheAgreementhasverystricttimerequirements.Thephrase ?A? completescheduled c   pickup[] ?@? Ԁmakesclearthattheconcernisnotlimitedtopickupsthatare ?A? missed, ?@? Ԁbut   alsoincludespickupsthatarenotmade ?A? onschedule ?@? ԀandforwhichSanctionsare   applicable.XX?XXXX      !   5      ?XX 1    Finally,PhoenixarguesthatapickupislateonlyifJHHgives ?A? writtennotice(a >  ?>? LateNotice ?=? )...within24hoursafterthepickupinquestion, ?@? Ԁandabsentsuchwritten O notice,theprovisionsrelatingtoaMajorBackupdonotapplybecausetheLatePickup r provisionoftheAgreementprovidesthat ?A? NoSanctionshallbeapplicableunlessalate m NoticeofthepickupisgiveninaccordancewiththisExhibitG. ?@? ԀThisCourtrejectsthat  argument.ThelanguageprovidingthatthefirstcriteriaforaMajorBackupisPhoenix ?=? s * failuretomake ?A? threeCompleteScheduledPickups...forwhichSanctionsare ; applicableunderExhibitG, ?@? ԀisadefinitionofsanctionableconductbyPhoenixthatcan ^  initiateaMajorBackupNotice. o"   Incontrast,thereferenceintheLatePickupprovisiontoa ?A? LateNotice ?@? Ԁrefersto  |$ aprerequisitetotheimpositionofamonetarysanction.Itisnotapartofthedefinitionof "& whatissanctionableconduct.TheLateNoticeprovidesanopportunityforPhoenixto $(  ?A? contesttheapplicabilityofthesanction, ?@? ԀwhichitcouldnotdointheabsenceofNotice: w f8  8`   TheWasteSuppliershallgiveMWAwrittennotice(a ?>? Late  Notice ?@? )ofanypickuptowhichitbelievesanintermediate g Sanctionisapplicablewithin24hoursafterthepickupin 4 question.MWAmaycontesttheapplicabilityofthe m intermediateSanctionstoanypickupforwhichalateNotice /  isreceived.Nosanctionshallbeapplicabletoapickupunless  z aLateNoticeisgiveninaccordancewiththisExhibitG. <` x` x fAdifferentNoticeoflatepickupsisrequiredwhenthelatepickupsformthebasisofan 7   allegedMajorBackup.UnderthosecircumstancesJHHmustgive:  D  8  8`   MWAawrittennoticeofcauseforsuspension...stating ?  that,atthetimeofthenotice,the[late]pickupshavenotbeen L  madeandMWA ?=? sfailuretoremedythesituationwillresult G  insuspension.j` x` x   Phoenix ?=? sargumentthatthisinterpretationisincorrect,becauseitmeansthatthe e provisionaboutmissingthreepickupswithinonedayissurplusage,doesnotleadthis  Courttoadifferentresult.ThelanguageoftheAgreementmakesclearthattimewas   crucial;thusrepetitiveprovisionsrelatingtotimearenotsurprising.Seepages232521  below.  f8  8`   0 ` x` x ` 3. Failuretomake ?A? ThreeCompleteScheduled   Pickups ?@ ? f! x x f  PhoenixcorrectlyarguesthatJHHmayonlyrelyupontheallegedmissedpickups m# thatitcitedinitslettergivingNoticeofMajorBackup:the4:00p.m.,8:00p.m.,and  z% 10:45p.m.pickupsonJanuary14thandthe7:00a.m.and12:30p.m.pickupsonJanuary u"' 15th.Asdiscussedabove,thisCourtfindsthatbecausePhoenixhasinfactadmittedthat #) itfailedtomakethe4:00p.m.,8:00p.m.,and10:45p.m.pickupsonJanuary14th,thusit }%!+ hasadmittedthatitfailedtomake ?A? threeCompleteScheduledPickups. ?@? ԀThisCourt '"- willnonethelessmakefindingsoffactastothosepickupstominimizetheneedfora ($$/ retrialintheeventthatanappellatecourtdisagreeswiththisCourt ?=? sdenialoftheMotion w toConformitsAnswertotheCounterclaimtotheEvidenceatTrial.    MikePlank,PresidentofPhoenixandRichardMontgomery,Chairmanofthe  BoardofPhoenixtestifiedtheNoticeofMajorBackupprovisiondidnotapplybecauseas   shownbythemanifestsandthescaletickets,PhoenixmadethreepickupsonJanuary  & 14th,andnineonJanuary15th.Thistestimonyisbasedonaninterpretationofthe !   AgreementthatthisCourtrejectsandisnotcrediblebecauseitisinconsistentwiththe  .  contemporaneouslyprepared )    6  TransportationLogswhichshowwhenpickupswerescheduledtooccurandwhenthey w actuallydidoccur.ThoseLogsXX?XXXX      "   6      ?XXԀshowthefollowingfortheapplicabledates:  f  XX? TuesdayJanuary14,2003 ?XX  *#$ d` dS @S @ @ (#(#,td@,td@,td@,tt@+  6 '22 C6 /XX?Scheduled   PickupTime ; ,! @C  C; /fdfdLeave /   /Yard ; ,!Y  C  C; ;:/fdfdArrive /   /Yard ? ,!Y C  C? ;:/fd-` hX- /fdComments S D,/C     CS ;:/ /16:00 ; ,!B C  C; ;:/fd /fd23:10 ; ,! |C  C; ;:/fd /fd00:45 ? ,! |C  C? ;:/fd-` hX- /fd  11503Dshift N ?' |C    CN ;:/ /20:00 ; ,! VC  C; ;:/fd /fd21:15 ; ,!~ C  C; ;:/fd /fd22:55 ? ,!~ C  C? ;:/fd-` hX- /fd  11503D P ?'~  C     CP ;:/ /22:45 = ,!X "C  C= ;:/fd /fd20:10 = ,!  $C  C= ;:/fd /fd22:30 ? ,!  &C  C? ;:/fd-` hX- /d  11(sic)1503D?XX<20  (C       < /f  B.` hp x (#XBXX? @  WednesdayJanuary15,2003 ?XXԈ m ( *%& ddtd@td@td@tt@#$(#(#,td@,td@,td@,tt@+  6 '  )   C6 /XX?Scheduled { + PickupTime?XX ; ,!.,C  C; /fdfdXX?Leave  .  /Yard?XX ; ,!G /C  C; F6/fdfdXX?Arrive  1  /Yard?XX ? ,!G 2C  C? F6/fd-` hX-fdXX? /Comments S D,G 5C     CS ;:/ /7:00 ; ,!07C  C; ;:/fd /fd20:30 ; ,!j9C  C; ;:/fd /fd21:40 ? ,!j;C  C? ;:/fd-` hX- /fd  P ?'j=C    CP ;:/ /12:30 = ,!D?C  C= ;:/fd /fd18:25 = ,!lAC  C= ;:/fd /fd20:15 ? ,!lCC  C? ;:/fd-` hX- /fd  7-+lEC     7 ;:/B.` hp x (#XBf?XXThoseLogsclearlyshowthatPhoenixwasover61minuteslateforthosefivescheduled `F pickups. mH   TheCourtrejectsPlanks'testimonythatthisinformationwasrecordedincorrectlyin hJ theLogs.AsJHHpointsouttheTransportationLogconsistentlyreflectsfromNovember uL 4,2002throughJanuary15,2003thatpickupswereregularlymadethedayaftertheywere pN scheduledtooccur.Plank ?=? stestimonythathedidnotknowhowtheLogswerekeptis }P rejectedbytheCourt.  R   Insum,theCourtfindsthatPhoenix ?A? fail[d]stomake(i)threeCompleteScheduled "T Pickups...forwhichSanctionsareapplicable...withinaoneweekperiod,or(ii)..within #5V aday. ?@?  0% X 8  8`   0 ` x` x ` 4. BackupofMorethan50CartsofWaste w x x   OneofthecriteriaforaMajorBackupisthatasaresultof ?A? thefailure[tomakethree  CompleteScheduledpickups]morethan50cartsofwaste[is]backedupat[JHH]. ?@? Ԁ  RelyingonaletterfromPhoenix ?=? scounselpreparedandsentafterthecleanup,JHHargues /  thatthecleanupremoved375carts.Basedonthefactthatthepickupschedulealternated  R betweenpickingup60and42carts,JHHarguesthatthesanctionablepickupsresultedin M   betweeneither246or264ofthe375cartsnotbeingpickedupbecausefivemissedpickups  Z  meanthateither246carts(threetrailerscarrying42andtwocarrying60),or264carts(three U  of60andtwoof42)werenotpickedup.Thus,JHHarguesthereweremorethan50carts b  ofwastebackedup. ]    ThisCourtrejectsthatanalysis.MikePlank,Phoenix ?=? sPresidenttestifiedthatthe j informationinthatletterwaswrongandtheactualpickupiswhatisshownbythemanifests. { Themanifestsshowthenumberofcartsandboxespickedup,andmostimportantlythey  showtheweightofthewastepickedup.ThisCourtagreesandfindsthatthemanifestsare   amoreaccuratereflectionoftheamountofwastepickedupduringthecleanup.AsPhoenix  points,outbecausecartsshouldaverage95pounds,theCourtshouldnotcountthenumber  ofactualcartsPhoenixused.InsteadtheCourtshouldlookattheweightofthewastepicked   upduringthecleanuptodetermineiftherewasabackup.Todothecomparisonincarts,the " weightmustbedividedby95,theaverageweightcartsshouldbeunderthetermsofthe  $ Agreement.Phoenixshouldnotbepenalizedbecauseitputmorethan95poundsinsome !$& ofthecartsorbecauseitputsomeofthewasteinboxesinsteadofcarts.Thus,todetermine #( iftherewasover50cartsbackedup,theCourtmustdetermineiftherewasmorethan4750 $, * poundsofwaste(50cartsweighinganaverageof95poundseach(50x95))backedup. '&!,   Themanifestsshowthattherewereninepickupsforthecleanup:  '4#. *'( Sddtd@td@td@tt@%&(#(#,rtd@,td@,tt@+  6 'ww C6 fXX? Timeof   Return G  /toPhoenix ; ,!qC"  C; ;:/fd /fd  Weightof t Waste ? ,!'C   C? /fd$` X$fd  Equivalentnumber t  ofcartsassuming '  95lbs. Q   /  S D, C     CS ;:/ /  19:35 ; ,!C   C; ;:/fd /fd  2,400 ? ,!6C   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  25 N ?'6C     CN ;:/ /  20:15 ; ,! C   C; ;:/fd /fd  6,260 ? ,!8 C   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  66 N ?'8 C     CN ;:/ /  21:38 ; ,! C   C; ;:/fd /fd  7,260 ? ,! LC   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  76 N ?' LC     CN ;:/ /  22:55 ; ,! & !C   C; ;:/fd /fd  5,640 ? ,!N #C   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  59 N ?'N %C     CN ;:/ /  00:14 ; ,!( 'C   C; ;:/fd /fd  5,320 ? ,!b )C   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  56 N ?'b +C     CN ;:/ /  01:43 ; ,!< -C   C; ;:/fd /fd  6,380 ? ,!d /C   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  67 N ?'d 1C     CN ;:/ /  2:57 ; ,!> 3C   C; ;:/fd /fd  6,940 ? ,!x 5C   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  73 N ?'x 7C     CN ;:/ /  5:09 ; ,!R9C   C; ;:/fd /fd  4,840 ? ,!z;C   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  51 N ?'z=C     CN ;:/ /  5:54 ; ,!T?C   C; ;:/fd /fd  5,200 ? ,!AC   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  55 P ?'CC     CP ;:/ /  Total = ,!hEC   C= ;:/fd /fd  50,240 ? ,!GC   C? ;:/fd$` X$ /fd  528 7-+IC     7 ;:/f  B.` hp x (#XB?XX  TheCourtfindsthatthetotalwastepickedupduringthecleanupwas50,240pounds,which UK istheequivalentof529carts.XX?XXXX      )   7      ?XXԀ50,240poundsor529cartsisclearlymorethan4750pounds bM or50carts. ]O   Phoenixarguesthatthereareseveralreasonsfortheamountofwastecollected jQ unrelatedtoitsfailuretocompletesomescheduledpickups:(1)JHHemployeesdidnotload eS thebagsintocartsandhavethecartsonthedockasrequiredbythecontract;(2)thebackup  rU wasteshouldnotincludewastethatwasbroughttothedockbyJHHemployeesduringthe m"W cleanup;(3)JHHemployeesloadedfewerthan42or60cartsonthetrailers;and(4)JHH #zY employeesdidnotfillcartswithsufficientwaste,i.e.95poundspercart. u% [ *  TheAgreementprovidesthatJHHmusthavethewaste ?A? availableontheloadingdock &"] * *w *  incartsorinthetrailersleftonsite. ?@? ԀSomeofthewastePhoenixpickedupduringtheclean  upwasonthefloorandhadnotbeenbaggedbyJHH.ThisCourtagreeswithPhoenixthat J itwasundernoobligationtopickupwastefromthefloor;however,accordingtoMichael  Plank,only15to20%ofthewastepickedupwasonthefloor.Excluding20%ofthewaste R  Phoenixpickedupthatnightleaves40,192pounds,theequivalentof423carts,morethan  & the4750pound,50cartminimumforaBackup.Phoenixisalsocorrectthatitwasunderno Z   obligationtoremovewastethatwasbroughttothedockwhileitwascleaningup.The  .  TransportationLogshowsthattwoofthepickupsduringthecleanupweretheregularly b  scheduled8:00p.m.and10:45p.m.pickups,whichwouldaccountfor9,690pounds,the 6  equivalentof102carts.ThisCourtfindsthatatmost9,690pounds,theequivalentof102 j  cartsarrivedduringthecleanup.Thatstillleaves30,502pounds,theequivalentof321carts, > attributabletothebackup. r   Duringthecleanup,JHHemployeeswerenotrequiredtofillcartsbroughttoJHHto F removewastethatwasbackedup.Forregularpickups,Phoenixisonlyrequiredtopickup z wasteincartsandonthedock,butwhenthereisNoticeofaMajorBackup,Phoenixmust N cometothesitewith ?A? sufficienttractors,trailers,equipment,andpersonneltoeffectthe  promptremovalofallthewastethatwastohavebeenremovedbythemissedorpartial l  pickups. ?@? ԀTheAgreementrequiresthatPhoenix ?A? dropeverything ?@? ԀtorespondtotheMajor " Backup.ItdoesnotrequirethatJHHemployees ?A? dropeverything ?@? Ԁtohelp.Thus,JHH : $ employeeswerenotrequiredtofillcartsandloadthemontrailersbroughttocleanupthe !$&   X#( backup.Phoenixwasrequiredtopickupthewastethatwasbaggedbutnotincartsbefore  thecleanupbegan. 4   WhiletheevidencedoesshowthatduringthetimeperiodfromDecember2,2002  throughtheJanuary8,200312:30p.m.pickup,thenumberofcartspickedupfromJHHwas <  significantlylowerthan42or60,beginningwiththeJanuary8th12:30p.m.pickupthrough   theJanuary14thpickups,inmostinstancesthenumberofcartspickedupwas42or60.The D   sameistrueforweight.FromJanuary8ththroughJanuary15th,therewere27pickupsand    onlysixwerelessthenanaverageof100poundsacartandtheweightsofthosewere88,92, L  99,84,96and55.Thus,weightwasnotatissueatthetimeofthebackup.   0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# ` 5. ForceMajeure T  (# (#   TheAgreementprovidesthatSanctionsdonotapplyif ?A? aForceMajeureprevents ( MWA ?=? strucksortrailersfrommakingatimelypickup. ?@? ԀAForceMajeureisdefinedas r f8  8`   AnactofGod,actofapublicenemy,naturaldisasteror  \ condition,fireorothercausenotwithinthecontroloftheparty  claimingthatitsperformanceshouldbeexcusedbyreason  thereof...R` x` x fPhoenixarguesthattheBackupwascausedbytwoforcemajeures:(a)aJanuary11,2003 & failureofoneoftheincineratorsatPhoenixwhiletheotherwasoffline(notinservice)for Z regularlyscheduledmaintenance,thuscausingbothincineratorstobedown;and(b)on .! January15,2003,apickuptruckblockedPhoenix ?=? segressfromthedocksoitcouldnothaul b# awaythetrailercontainingcartsofwaste.  L% +  TheAgreementprovidesthatsanctionsdonotapplyto ?A? Ԁanypickupiftheloading "' dockisnotavailableforMWA ?=? struckortrailer. ?@? ԀThus,Phoenixwasnotresponsiblefor $j) thetruckblockingegress,butthatwasneitheraforcemajeurenorthecauseoftheMajor %!+ Backup.Theillegallyparkedtruckmadeitimpossibletoremoveatrailerfilledwithcarts 8'"- thatarenotincludedintheMajorBackup.Further,theMajorBackupwasnotcausedbythe ( $/ + +9 +  hourandtwentyminutedelaythatresultedfromtheillegallyparkedtruck.    TheCourtrejectsPhoenix ?=? sargumentthatthefailureofoneofthetwoincinerators 4 whilethefirstwasdownformaintenancecausedtheMajorBackup.Bothincineratorswere  downfrommidnightJanuary11thuntiltheearlymorningofJanuary13th.Phoenixpointsout R  thatthisoutageoccurredjustasitwasrecoveringfromanemergencyoutageofoneofits  & incineratorsfrom6:30a.m.onJanuary8thuntilshortlyaftermidnightonJanuary9th.The Z   AgreementrequiredPhoenixtohaveaBackupSystem:  .  f8  8`   Inrecognitionofitsresponsibilitytofulfillitsobligationsto b  acceptandremoveacceptableWasteinaccordancewiththe $t  WasteSupplyAgreementMWAshall,atitsexpense,provide 6  redundancyinitswasteacceptanceandtransportationservices   andshallapprisetheWasteSupplieroftheuseofsuchBackup j  Systems.,|` x` x fTherehadbeenacontinuousdiscussionbetweenthepartiesduring1996and2003  concerningbackupplans,butPhoenixdidnothavesuchaplanforJHHinJanuary2003. 4   Thefailuretohaveand/orimplementaBackupPlanasrequiredbytheAgreement  wasnot ?A? [a]nactofGod,actofapublicenemy,naturaldisasterorcondition,fireorother < causenotwithinthecontrolofthepartyclaimingthatitsperformanceshouldbeexcusedby & reasonthereof.... ?@? ԀAsdiscussedbelow,aftertheBackup,oneoftherecommendationsof Z theIndependentEngineerwasthatPhoenixhaveaBackupPlanforJHHduringan D! incineratoroutage.ThatrecommendationisafurtherrecognitionthatnothavingaBackup x# PlanwasnotoutsideofPhoenix ?=? scontrol,andthuswasnotaforcemajeure.  L%   "' 98  8`     B. ` ServiceofNoticeofMajorBackup ` x` x   PhoenixarguesthatJHHfailedtocomplywiththeNoticerequirementbecausethe 4 WasteSupplyAgreementprovidesthatallnoticesbesenttoPhoenix ?=? scounsel,NeilJ.  Ruther,andthatJHHdidnotsendtheNoticetoRuther.TheFirstAmendmentprovidedthat R  noticescouldbefaxedandthetimeforactionisbaseduponPhoenix ?=? s ?A? receiptofthe  & notice. ?@? ԀTheNoticeofMajorBackupwasfaxedtoPlank,Phoenix ?=? sPresident,andfaxed p   andhanddeliveredtoOber,Kaler,Grimes&Shriver,addressedtoRuther.Ruther,whono  Z  longerworkedatOber,Kaler,Grimes&Shriver,didnotreceivetheNoticeuntilthenextday   whenPhoenix,notJHH,sentittohim. b    UndertheWasteSupplyAgreementeachpartydesignatedapersontoreceiveNotice.   Phoenixmadethefollowingdesignation: j f8  8`   8 ` x` xNeilJ.Ruther,Esquire   8  8`   8 ` x` xOber,Kaler,Grimes&Shriver`   8  8`   8 ` x` x1600MarylandNationalBankBuilding"r   8  8`   8 ` x` x10LightStreet4   8  8`   8 ` x` xBaltimore,Maryland21202   8  8`   8 ` x` x3016851120h   fTheAgreementalsoprovidedthat ?A? Eachpartyshallhavetheright,fromtimetotime,to < designateadifferentpersonand/oraddressbynoticegiveninconformitywiththissection. ?@?   (Emphasisadded.)Thatsectionrequiredthatanychangeindesignationbeinwriting: ?A? The  p! authorizedrepresentativeofeachofthepartiesforthepurposeshereofshallbethepersons  # designatedbeloworsuchotherpersonsthepartiesmayfromtimetotimedesignatein >!% writing... ?@? Ԁ(emphasisadded).TherewasnoevidencethatPhoenixatanytimegave "'  ?A? noticeinconformitywith ?@? ԀtheabovesectionthatRutherhadadifferentaddress. \$)   %F!+ 9  PlankreceivedtheNoticeby3:50p.m.atthelatest,thus,theNoticeofMajorBackup  wasvalid.ThefactthatRutherreceiveditlaterisnotJHH ?=? sfaultbecausePhoenixhadnot 4 giventherequisitewrittennoticeofchangeofaddress.  8  0`     C. ` ArrivalatJHHwithin3hours R ` `    TheAgreementprovidesthat ?A? withinthreehours ?@? ԀafterithasreceivedtheNoticeof  & MajorBackup,PhoenixmustarriveatJHH ?A? withsufficienttractors,trailers,equipment,and p   personneltoeffectthepromptremovalofallwastethatwastohavebeenremovedbythe  Z  missedorpartialpickups. ?@? ԀThus,whilePhoenixwasnotrequiredtocompletethepickup   withinthreehours,itwasrequiredtohaveallthetractors,trailers,equipment,andpersonnel (x  neededtodosoatJHHwithinthreehours.JHHarguesthatthewasteofthefive   uncompletedpickupswasatleast246carts,andevenconsideringthe1hourand20minute 0 delaycausedbytheillegallyparkedtruck,Phoenixfailedtomeetitsobligation.Phoenix  doesnotarguethatithadallthenecessarytractors,trailers,equipment,andpersonnelatJHH 8 withinthreehours.Rather,Phoenixarguesthattimewasnotoftheessence,andfurtherthat   itwasphysicallyimpossibletogeteverythingtherewithinthreehours. @           ?+ ` hp x (#X?0 ` 0 ` (#` (# ` 1. TimeoftheEssence󀀀 (# (# BdPh        E.` hp x (#` XE  Thephrase ?A? timeisoftheessence ?@? ԀdoesnotappearintheAgreement,buttimewas H  clearlyoftheessence.Thereisnorequirementthatthephrase ?A? timeisoftheessence ?@? Ԁbe 2" intheAgreementinorderfortimeinfacttobeoftheessence.In Stringv.Steven | $ DevelopmentCorp.,269Md.569,575576(1973),theCourtofAppealsstated:  "T& 8  8`   Whethertimeistobeconsideredasoftheessenceofthe #( contract,must,ofcourse,dependupontheintentionofthe  %\ * parties.Whenthisintentionisexpressedinclearand &!, unambiguousterms,thecontractmustspeakforitself,andthe (d#. liabilityof ,  - thepartiesmustbedeterminedbytheplainand )$0 obviousmeaningofthelanguageused.` x` x .(Citationomitted.) ?A? Timelyperformanceoftenisanabsoluterequirementevenifthe 4 contractdoesnotcontainthetalismanicphrase ?>? timeisoftheessence. ?=@? ԀEldaArnholdand  Byzantio,L.L.C.v.OceanAtlanticWoodlandCorp.,284F.3d693,699700(7thCir.2002). h    TheFirstAmendmentcouldnotbeclearerthattimeisoftheessenceinthis  < Agreement.TheFirstAmendmentbeginswitharecitationthatthe ?A? CapitalImprovement p   ProgramincludesimprovementstotheTransportationSystem,whicharedesignedtomeet  Z  theschedulesforwastepickupsfrom[JHH]inareliablemanner. ?@? Ԁ(Emphasisadded.)The   FirstAmendmentdidnotevengointoeffectuntiltheIndependentEngineerhad ?A? identified (x  thoseportionsoftheCapitalImprovementProgramthatareneededbeforeMWAcanprovide  reliableservice, ?@? ԀandcertifiedthattheProgramhasbeencompleted.Therearedetailedtime F tablesfortheimpositionofSanctionsforlateandmissedpickups(setoutatpages1011 0 above).TheFirstAmendmentaddeddetailedprovisionsprovidingpositiveandnegative d consequencesinconnectionwithan ?A? OnTimePickupRate. ?@?  8 f8  8`   PaymentsorDeposits***[I]ftheOnTimePickupRateforall  FoundingHospitalsforamonthislessthan90%,within5 D BusinessDaysaftertheendofthemonthMVAshall,in V additiontotheSanctions,deposit$5,000intotheTransportation  ImprovementFund.***IftheaggregateOnTimeRateforall   pickupsofalloftheFoundingHospitalsislessthan90%for L! twoconsecutivemonths,MWAshall,upontherequestofthe ^" OperatingCommitteeestablishedunderthePrimeAgreement,  # causetheIndependentEngineertodeterminethecauseofthe  $ deficiencyinserviceandidentifyimprovementstothe T!% TransportationSystemwhichwouldremedythedeficiency.*** "f& IftheOnTimeRatefortheAggregateGuaranteedAnnual "(' TonnageofallFoundingHospitalsforthepriorsixmonths #( exceeds97%,MWAmay,aftertransferringtotheCapital \$) MaintenanceFundanamountequaltothetransfersmadetothe %n * TransportationImprovementFundfromtheCapital %0!+ MaintenanceFund,releaseallremainingfundsinthe &!, TransportationImprovementFundandapplythemtoanylawful d'"- purposesXX?.?XX   h &(v#.` x` x f  Furthermore,theintroductiontothesectionprovidingforaNoticeofMajorBackup (8$/ andNoticeofSuspensionemphasizestheneedforstrictperformanceunderthetermsofthe l*%1 . .e9 .  FirstAmendment:  f8  8`   (b)MWAacknowledgesthatWasteSupplierhassuspended 4 performanceundertheWasteSupplyAgreementpursuanttothe F LetterasprovidedintheLetter.***Inconsiderationofthe  rescissionoftheLetter,MWArecognizesthatithasan z obligationnotagaintoimpairtheWasteSupplier ?=? sexpectation <  ofreceivingperformanceunderthisAgreement Y` x` x 8  8`   (1)Accordingly,ifatanytimeaftertheEffectiveDate,  ` x` x 8  8`   8 ` x` x(A)MWAfailstomake[threeComplete  a  ScheduledPickupswhichcause50cartsofwaste  #  tobebackedup,JHHmaygiveaNoticeofMajor   Backup]W    fFinally,itisclearfromthelanguageoftheAgreementprovidingforNoticeofMajorBackup +  andNoticeofSuspensionthattimeisoftheessence.Thereisaclearlydefinedtimeperiod _  forthe ?A? threeCompleteScheduledPickups, ?@? Ԁaclearlydefinedtimeperiodforwhatisto 3 occurafterreceiptoftheNoticeofMajorBackup,andaclearlydefinedtimeperiodforJHH } toissueaNoticeofSuspensionandforPhoenixtorespondtoit. Q           ?+ ` hp x (#X?0 ` 0 ` (#` (# ` 2. Impossibilityofperformance (# (# 0 ` 0 ` (#` (# ` 1.  Y (# (# ^el        E.` hp x (#` XE  Phoenix ?=? sargumentthatitcouldnotgetmorethanonetraileratthedockatanygiven  timefailstoexcuseitfromhavingenoughtrailersandcartstherewithinthreehours.JHH 'w  argues,withevidencetosupportitsargument,thatmorethanonetrailercouldfitinthedock " atatime.Evenifonlyonetrailercouldfitinthedock,duringthetimethattheillegally / $ parkedtruckpreventedegressfromthedock,Phoenixcouldhavedeliveredcartsand !& personneltoJHH.Atminimum,Phoenixcouldhavebeenpreparingtrucks,cartsand 7#( personnelsothattheywouldhavebeenreadytoleavetheplantimmediatelyuponlearning $ * thattheillegallyparkedtruckhadmoved.Itdidneither.Theillegallyparkedtruckwasgone ?&!, by5:20p.m.ThefirstPhoenixtruckdidnotarriveuntil7:00p.m.,onehourandforty '#. minuteslater.Itonlytakesanaverageof20minutestogobetweenPhoenixandJHH. G)$0   Becausetheillegallyparkedtruckwasgoneby5:20p.m.,allthetractors,trailers,  equipment,andpersonnelneededtobeatJHHby8:20p.m.atthelatest.Thefirsttruckthat 4 arrivedonlycontained36carts.Assumingthatonlyonetrailercouldfitintothedockata  time,therewasnoreasonnottohavea60carttraileratthedockandanother60carttrailer <  waitingnearby.Plankacknowledgedthatthefirsttrailerthatarrivedhadonly36carts   becausePhoenixdidnothaveenoughcartstosend60.Phoenixarguesthatitwas D   unreasonabletoexpectittolineuptrucksandtrailersduringrushhour.Itwasnot.Inany    event,Phoenixdidnotbeginuntilafterrushhourwasoverandnevercameclosetolining L  uptrucksandtrailers.             ?+ ` hp x (#X?0 ` 0 ` (#` (# ` 3. FailuretoPerformWithinThreeHoursT  (# (# 0 ` 0 ` (#` (# ` 1. ( (# (# 8iel        E.` hp x (#` XE  Asexplainedabove,theCourthasfoundthat30,502pounds,theequivalentof321 \ cartsofwastebackedupatthetimeoftheNotice.(seediscussionatpages1516above). 0 Therefore,underthetermsoftheAgreement,equipmenttomove30,502poundsofwaste d neededtobeatJHHnolaterthan8:20p.m.,threehoursaftertheillegallyparkedtruck 8 moved.TheTransportationLogsandthemanifestsshowthetimethattrucksarrivedat l Phoenixandtheweightofthewaste.Forregularlyscheduledpickups,thereisatraileratthe @  dockwith42or60emptycartstobeloadedwithbaggedwastebyJHHemployees.When t" atruckarrivestopickupwaste,itpicksupthetrailerwiththefilledcartsandleavesatrailer H$ with60or42emptycarts.Thus,atruckreturnstoPhoenixwithcartsthatitdidnotbring |!& toJHH.Thetruckisatthedockonlylongenoughtomaketheexchange,anditthentakes #P( approximately20minutesforthetrucktoreturntoPhoenix.Duringthecleanupessentially $* thesamethingoccurredexceptthenumberofcartsvariedandPhoenix,notJHH,employees &X!, werefillingthecarts. '".   Thechartonthenextpage,basedonthemanifests,theTransportationLogs,andthe )`$0 testimonyofthewitnessesshowsthatbeforetheNoticeofBackupwassentorreceived,a  truckhadbroughtatrailerwith36cartstoJHH.Therefore,thecleanupbeganwith36carts. 4 Basedonthetestimonyofthewitnesses,theCourtisconvincedthatthetruckthatreturned  thosefilledcartstoPhoenixarrivedatJHHat7:00p.m.Thattruckisnotlistedonthe <  TransportationLogsoitisnotclearhowmanyemptycartsitbroughttoPhoenixwhenit   arrived.ItreturnedtoPhoenixat7:35p.m.withthe36carts.AnothertruckleftPhoenixat D   6:25p.m.andbrought33emptycarts.Eachtruckthatfollowedpickedupwaste,and    broughtemptycarts. L    ThefourthtruckleftPhoenixat9:15p.m.andreturnedat10:55p.m.Itbrought36   emptycartsandsomeboxes.Basedontheamountofwaste,therewasstillnotenoughcarts T  and/orboxesatJHHtopickupallthebackedupwaste.ThenexttruckthatwenttoJHHis ( notlistedontheTransportationLogsothereisnowayofdeterminingtheexacttimethatit \ leftPhoenixorthenumberofcartsitbroughttoJHH.TheCourtfindsthatitdidnotleave 0 Phoenixbeforetheprecedingtruckarrived,i.e.10:55p.m;therefore,theearliestthatitgot d toJHHwas11:15p.m.,anditmayhavehadsufficientcartstocompletetheremovalofthe 8 backedupwaste.Ifitdid,itwastoolittle,toolate.Asdiscussedabove,alloftheequipment l andpersonnelforthecleanupneededtobeatJHHnolaterthan8:20p.m.,threehoursafter @  theillegallyparkedtruckhadmoved.Elevenfifteen(11:15p.m.)wasalmostsixhoursafter t" the8:20p.m.deadline,almostthreehourstoolate. H$   Thus,Phoenixdidnotget ?A? sufficienttractors,trailers,equipment,andpersonnel ?@? Ԁto |!& JHH ?A? toeffectthepromptremovalofallwastethatwastohavebeenremovedbythemissed #f( orpartialpickups ?@? Ԁwithin3hoursofreceiptoftheNoticeofMajorBackup. $ *   J&!, TRP$'3+ X3' Letter'3 Letter Landscape3'TXweX/ fT@XX` hp x (#%'0*,.XT*01 d Sdrtd@rtd@tt@'(X.X.,td@,rtd@,'td@,td@,Ftd@,tt@+  6 ' C6 /f  &<%? Scheduled  PickupTime ; ,!7C   C; /d  ! XXXXX!d  TimeTruck 6 LeftPhoenix .  /(#ofEmpty v cartsdropped n  offatJHH) ; ,! C"  C; /d  d  TimeTruck 6  Returned .   /toPhoenix ; ,!vC"  C; /A/d /d  Weightof 6 eachload ; ,!.C   C; /d  d  Cumulative 6 Weightof . waste v  /Pickedup ? ,!nC"  C? /A/d  -XX` hXXX-d  Comments  6   Thisinformationisbasedoncomparingthe . informationonthemanifesttothatonthe v TransportationLog.(TheJanuary15thand n January16thlogsareattached)    / S D,VC     CS /A/ /  XX%&<N/A ; ,!C   C; n</d! XXXXX! /d  N/A ; ,!!C   C; n</d  d  Jan.15th #  /19:35 ; ,!/$C"  C; n</d /d  2,400 ; ,!&C   C; n</d /d  2400 ? ,!(C   C? n</d-XX` hXXX- /d  &<%XXNOTLISTEDONTRANSPORTATIONLOG.Before * theNoticeofBackupwassent,thecartsthatthistruck z"+ pickeduphadbeendeliveredtoJHHbythetruckthat  , wasscheduledtomakeJanuary14th12:30p.m.pickup  b- (whicharrivedonJanuary15that3:30p.m.).XX%&< N ?'Z .C    CN n</Jan.15th  w 0  /12:30 ; ,!| $ 1C"  C; n</d  ! XXXXX!d  Jan.15th  . 3 Ѐ18:25 3 4  /(33) ; ,! 5C"  C; n</d  d  Jan.15th  . 7 Ѐ20:15 3 8  / ; ,! 9C"  C; n</d /d  6,260 ; ,! . ;C   C; n</d /d  8660 ? ,! . =C   C? n</d-XX` hXXX- /d  N ?' . ?C    CN n</Jan.15th e A  /Ӏ7:00 ; ,! BC"  C; n</d  ! XXXXX!d  Jan.15th  D 20:30 q E  /(33) ; ,!v FC"  C; n</d  d  Jan.15th  H Ѐ21:38 q I  / ; ,!v JC"  C; n</d /d  7,260 ; ,! LC   C; n</d /d  15,920 ? ,! NC   C? n</d-XX` hXXX- /d  N ?' PC    CN n</Jan.14th R  /20:00 ; ,!PSC"  C; n</d  ! XXXXX!d  Jan.15th ZU 21:15 _V  /(36) ; ,! WC"  C; n</d  d  Jan.15th ZY  /22:55 ; ,!_ZC"  C; n</d /d  5,640 ; ,!Z\C   C; n</d /d  21,560 ? ,!Z^C   C? n</d-XX` hXXX- /d   N ?'Z`C    CN n</ /  N/A ; ,!9bC   C; n</d! XXXXX! /d  N/A ; ,!HdC   C; n</d  d  Jan.16th Hf  /00:14 ; ,!gC"  C; n</d /d  5,320 ; ,!HiC   C; n</d /d  26,880 ? ,!HkC   C? n</d-XX` hXXX- /d  &<%XXNOTLISTEDONTRANSPORTATIONLOGXX%&< N ?'HmC    CN n</ Jan.15th z"o  /16:00 ; ,!'pC"  C; n</d  ! XXXXX!d  Jan.16th 1r 00:45 s  /(60) ; ,!3tC"  C; n</d  d  Jan.16th 1v  /01:43 ; ,!wC"  C; n</d /d  6,380 ; ,!1yC   C; n</d /d  33,260 ? ,!1{C