James Baird Co. v. Gimbel Bros., Inc. case brief summary
64 F.2d 344 (1933)
CASE FACTS
Defendant merchant sent contractors who were likely to bid on a construction job an offer to supply material needed for the job at set prices. Defendant did not realize that he was mistaken about the total quantity of the material needed for the job. Plaintiff contractor received defendant's offer and bid on the construction job that same day, basing its bid on the prices quoted by defendant. Later that same day, defendant telegraphed a withdrawal of the offer to contractors, having learned of his mistake. Plaintiff formally accepted defendant's offer several days after receiving the telegraph and the written confirmation of withdrawal. Defendant refused to recognize a contract, and plaintiff sued for breach of contract. The trial court directed a verdict for defendant.
HOLDING
The court affirmed, holding that because the offer was withdrawn before it was accepted, the acceptance was too late.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that defendant had withdrawn his offer before it was accepted by plaintiff.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Property Law
Shop for Law School Course Materials
.
64 F.2d 344 (1933)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiff contractor appealed a
judgment of the District Court of the United States for the Southern
District of New York, which directed a verdict for defendant merchant
after plaintiff sued for breach of contract.CASE FACTS
Defendant merchant sent contractors who were likely to bid on a construction job an offer to supply material needed for the job at set prices. Defendant did not realize that he was mistaken about the total quantity of the material needed for the job. Plaintiff contractor received defendant's offer and bid on the construction job that same day, basing its bid on the prices quoted by defendant. Later that same day, defendant telegraphed a withdrawal of the offer to contractors, having learned of his mistake. Plaintiff formally accepted defendant's offer several days after receiving the telegraph and the written confirmation of withdrawal. Defendant refused to recognize a contract, and plaintiff sued for breach of contract. The trial court directed a verdict for defendant.
HOLDING
The court affirmed, holding that because the offer was withdrawn before it was accepted, the acceptance was too late.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that defendant had withdrawn his offer before it was accepted by plaintiff.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Property Law
Shop for Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment