Appellant John Newton, dba Pago Pago Consultants, appeals the Trial Division’s dismissal of his breach of contract claim against ASTCA. The appeal challenges the court’s ruling that the 2010 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was not an enforceable contract due to the absence of a written mutually agreed upon start date. Newton argues that this interpretation is both legally and factually incorrect, as performance under the MOU began immediately with ASTCA’s transmission of listings and Newton’s acceptance of the data, which satisfied the intent and practical effect of the “mutually agreed upon date” clause.

Newton further asserts that ASTCA materially breached the Agreement by failing to deliver complete, usable subscriber listings necessary to produce telephone directories—an obligation it had fulfilled in prior contracts for over a decade. The court also misread Newton’s request for a count of listings, falsely interpreting it as a demand for listing accuracy, based on erroneous testimony by ASTCA’s contracting officer.

Additionally, Newton details multiple instances of the trial court mischaracterizing evidence, failing to review submitted files, and exhibiting bias in interpreting communications. Appellant requests reversal of the dismissal, a finding of breach, and a remand for assessment of damages.