Tongish v. Thomas case brief summary
840 P.2d 471 (1992)
CASE FACTS
Appellee seller had a contract to sell sunflower seeds to appellant cooperative. Appellee delivered a portion of the seeds, but when the market price of sunflower seeds doubled, he stopped delivering to appellant and sold the seeds to defendant buyer. Defendant paid appellee for approximately one-half of the seeds and appellant filed an action to collect the balance. Appellant intervened in the action, seeking damages for breach of contract. The trial court awarded damages to appellant based on its loss of expected profits.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The intermediate appellate court reversed, holding that the difference between market price and contract price was the proper measure of damages pursuant to Kan. Stat. Ann. § 84-2-713 because it was more specific than the general damages provision of Kan. Stat. Ann. § 54-1-106.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the decision of the intermediate appellate court, which reversed the trial court's order and held that appellee seller had to pay damages to intervenor cooperative based on the difference between the market price and contract price under the provisions ofKan. Stat. Ann. § 84-2-713 in appellee's action to collect balance due from defendant buyer.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Contract Law
Shop for Law School Course Materials
.
840 P.2d 471 (1992)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Intervenor cooperative sought review of
the decision of the Court of Appeals (Kansas), which reversed the
trial court's order and held that appellee seller had to pay damages
to intervenor based on the difference between the market price and
contract price in appellee's action to collect balance due from
defendant buyer.CASE FACTS
Appellee seller had a contract to sell sunflower seeds to appellant cooperative. Appellee delivered a portion of the seeds, but when the market price of sunflower seeds doubled, he stopped delivering to appellant and sold the seeds to defendant buyer. Defendant paid appellee for approximately one-half of the seeds and appellant filed an action to collect the balance. Appellant intervened in the action, seeking damages for breach of contract. The trial court awarded damages to appellant based on its loss of expected profits.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The intermediate appellate court reversed, holding that the difference between market price and contract price was the proper measure of damages pursuant to Kan. Stat. Ann. § 84-2-713 because it was more specific than the general damages provision of Kan. Stat. Ann. § 54-1-106.
DISCUSSION
- On appeal, the court affirmed the intermediate appellate court's decision, holding that the difference in market price and contract price was the correct method of measuring intervenor's damages.
- In addition to adopting the intermediate court's rationale, it held that damages computed under § 84-2-713 encouraged the honoring of contracts and market stability.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the decision of the intermediate appellate court, which reversed the trial court's order and held that appellee seller had to pay damages to intervenor cooperative based on the difference between the market price and contract price under the provisions ofKan. Stat. Ann. § 84-2-713 in appellee's action to collect balance due from defendant buyer.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Contract Law
Shop for Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment