Need to understand the agreement clause

[Harryv]

Jurisdiction

California

We are partnering with one of the software providers. I understood all the terms except the one below:

Limitation of Liability . Other than claims for amounts due under this Agreement, the parties' aggregate liability for any and all claims arising out of or in connection with this agreement shall not exceed two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000), and (ii) in no event shall either party be liable for any indirect, special, incidental, punitive, or consequential damages, including, without limitation, damages resulting from loss of profits or business arising out of or in connection with this agreement, even if either party has been

How should this be interpreted in laymen term?

 

[flyingron]

It says if you sue them you can't get more than $250,000 and certain types of damages as stated can't be recovered at all. Whether that is enforceable and whether it is something you should be concerned about is something you should discuss with your attorney.

 

[zddoodah]

the parties' aggregate liability for any and all claims arising out of or in connection with this agreement shall not exceed two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000)

I would hope the meaning of this is obvious to anyone fluent in English. If there's a part of this that you don't understand, please elaborate as to what you're having trouble with.

Other than claims for amounts due under this Agreement,

Claims for amounts due under this Agreement are not subject to the $250k cap.

(ii)

Why is there a "(ii)" but no "(i)"? This suggests that you've misquoted or selectively quoted or that the drafter of the document screwed something up.

in no event shall either party be liable for any indirect, special, incidental, punitive, or consequential damages

These types of damages are not recoverable. You can google for explanation of what these are, but they're things that wouldn't generally make sense in the context of a contract claim.

including, without limitation, damages resulting from loss of profits or business arising out of or in connection with this agreement

This is simply an elaboration on the prior list and points out that, specifically, lost profits aren't recoverable.

Also, why is "agreement" capitalized in the first line of the quote but not in this part of the quote?

even if either party has been

Even if the other party has been what? Again, either you've misquoted or selectively quoted or the drafter screwed up.

 

[flyingron]

We can't help you if you're going to keep changing the story. First, the trucks and vehicles are worth more than $15,000, now the whole estate is under $10,000. You need proper legal help before you get into serious criminal trouble.

 

[zddoodah]

We can't help you if you're going to keep changing the story. First, the trucks and vehicles are worth more than $15,000, now the whole estate is under $10,000. You need proper legal help before you get into serious criminal trouble.

Seems like you may have posted this in the wrong thread. The original post in this thread is the only post the OP has made here, and it has nothing to do with trucks or vehicles or an estate.

 

[flyingron]

Yep, wrong thread. Thought it was the guy the guy trying to game the NC car titling system. This guy just suddenly transported himself from the UK to California.