JEWELL-RUNG AGENCY, INC. V. THE HADDAD ORGANIZATION, LTD. 814 F.Supp. 337 (1993) CASE BRIEF

JEWELL-RUNG AGENCY, INC. V. THE HADDAD ORGANIZATION, LTD.
814 F.Supp. 337 (1993)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an action for breach of contract. Jewell (P) and Haddad (D) filed motions to strike portions of affidavits for a failure to satisfy the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e). D, the seller, also moved for summary judgment on the issue of damages.
FACTS: P ordered samples of Lakeland men's outerwear from D so that it might seek orders for this clothing from Canadian retailers. D supplied P with the ordered samples, which P used to obtain orders from customers in Canada. P placed an initial purchase order with D for 2,325 garments of Lakeland men's outerwear, having a total listed price of approximately $250,000 in American currency. P had taken orders for 372 of these garments at a wholesale price of $107,506 in Canadian currency. According to P's Complaint, D accepted its purchase order in January 1991 with the understanding that P would obtain an exclusive distributorship of Lakeland outerwear in Canada, but D, after accepting the order, granted a third party, Olympic Pant and Sportswear Co. ('Olympic'), the exclusive right to sell, manufacture, and market Lakeland outerwear throughout Canada. P alleges that D's acceptance of its January 1991 purchase order created a binding contract, which D subsequently breached by failing to fill the purchase order and entering into its exclusive distributorship agreement with Olympic. P further alleges that because it did not learn of D's alleged breach until February of 1991, it was unable to fill its customers' orders for Lakeland goods for the Fall 1991 season or to obtain a substitute line of men's outerwear and, as a result, sustained over $350,000 in damages. D seeks summary judgment with respect to damages on three grounds: (1) P's failure to mitigate damages bars any recovery; (2) P's refusal to cover prohibits recovery of consequential damages; and (3) alternatively, any recovery by P of lost profits must be limited to the profits derived from the orders already placed by P's customers at the time of D's breach of contract.

ISSUE:


RULE OF LAW:


HOLDING AND DECISION:


LEGAL ANALYSIS:





Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com




© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner

No comments:

Post a Comment