Unbeatablesale.com, Inc. v. LIM Supplies Corp. d/b/a LIM Group, Inc.

Unbeatablesale.com · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · January 29, 2026 · No. Civil Action No. 25-5389 (MAS) (JBD)

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey grants Defendant’s motion to dismiss a breach-of-contract action as barred by New Jersey’s six-year statute of limitations. The court rejects Plaintiff’s argument that the alleged cessation of freight-auditing services constituted a continuing breach, finding that the complaint alleged a single breach rather than successive breaches under an installment or periodically performed contract. The court allows Plaintiff an opportunity to amend to assert any claims that are not time-barred and can cure the identified deficiencies.

Holdings

  1. Under New Jersey law, a breach-of-contract claim is generally subject to a six-year statute of limitations accruing when the right to institute and maintain suit first arose. Plaintiff's claim accrued when Defendant allegedly ceased providing freight-auditing services in December 2018 and was untimely because Plaintiff did not file suit until May 23, 2025.
  2. The continuing-breach doctrine did not apply to Plaintiff's claim as pleaded because the Complaint did not plausibly allege an installment contract or a contract requiring periodic performance that produced successive breaches.
  3. Abstention was not warranted, and the court exercised its federal diversity jurisdiction.
  4. Plaintiff was given an opportunity to file an amended complaint to the extent it could assert claims that were not time-barred and could cure the deficiencies identified by the court.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Plaintiff's breach-of-contract claim was barred by New Jersey's six-year statute of limitations.
  2. Whether the continuing-breach doctrine applied because the Client Service Agreement allegedly involved continuing or periodic performance.
  3. Whether abstention was warranted because of the related pending New York action.
  4. Whether Plaintiff should be permitted to amend claims that might not be time-barred and could cure pleading deficiencies.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (20)

  • Phillips v. County of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 228 (3d Cir. 2008)(followed)
  • Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)(followed)
  • Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)(followed)
  • Malleus v. George, 641 F.3d 560, 563 (3d Cir. 2011)(followed)
  • Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 675, 678-79 (2009)(followed)
  • Fowler v. UPMC Shadyside, 578 F.3d 203, 210-11 (3d Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Hedges v. United States, 404 F.3d 744, 750 (3d Cir. 2005)(followed)
  • Kehr Packages, Inc. v. Fidelcor, Inc., 926 F.2d 1406, 1409 (3d Cir. 1991)(followed)
  • Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (1976)(followed)
  • Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp., 460 U.S. 1 (1983)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 20.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…