Wednesday, December 25, 2013

Hope’s Architectural Products v. Lundy’s Construction case brief

Hope’s Architectural Products v. Lundy’s Construction case brief summary
781 F.Supp. 711 (1991)

Plaintiff seller sued defendants, buyer and bank, for breach of contract and failure to pay on a bond regarding a contract for the purchase and installation of windows.

After seller missed the due date for delivery and installation of the windows, it notified buyer that it was suspending delivery of the windows until buyer provided assurances that there would be no back charge. Buyer declined and seller notified bank, demanding payment. Bank refused, and seller sued.


  • The reviewing court found in favor of bank and buyer, initially noting that the delivery of the goods was clearly untimely. 
  • Seller's argument that the delay was caused by problems that were outside of its control was rejected because seller gave no contemporaneous notice to buyer of any problems and produced no evidence at trial of any problems. 
  • The court found that seller could not demand assurances under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 84-2-609 because it was already in breach at the time. 
  • Additionally, seller was not permitted to recover under quantum meruit because it conferred no benefit on buyer. 
  • Because of those rulings, the claim against bank under the statutory bond was necessarily denied.

The court denied seller's claims for relief and entered judgment in favor of bank and buyer.

Suggested law school study materials

Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Evolution of Legal Marketing: From Billboards to Digital Leads Over the last couple of decades, the face of legal marketing has changed a l...