This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
KGM Harvesting Co. v. Fresh Network: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Infobox Case Brief | {{Infobox Case Brief | ||
|subject=Contracts | |subject=Contracts | ||
|facts=KGM Harvesting Co. sold lettuce, under contract, in large quantities to Fresh Network. Fresh, in turn, sold the lettuce to other buyers. When the price of lettuce more than doubled, KGM made a profit by selling to other buyers and not selling to Fresh. Fresh covered by buying elsewhere, but at a loss of approx. $700,000. | |facts=KGM Harvesting Co. sold lettuce, under contract, in large quantities to Fresh Network. Fresh, in turn, sold the lettuce to other buyers. When the price of lettuce more than doubled, KGM made a profit by selling to other buyers and not selling to Fresh. Fresh covered by buying elsewhere, but at a loss of approx. $700,000. | ||
|procedural_history=Jury determined that KGM breached contract, and the buyer was entitled to $655,906.22 with interest accruing from 30 days before trial. Seller appealed. | |procedural_history=Jury determined that KGM breached contract, and the buyer was entitled to $655,906.22 with interest accruing from 30 days before trial. Seller appealed. |
Latest revision as of 03:39, July 14, 2023
KGM Harvesting Co. v. Fresh Network | |
Court | |
---|---|
Citation | |
Date decided |
Facts
KGM Harvesting Co. sold lettuce, under contract, in large quantities to Fresh Network. Fresh, in turn, sold the lettuce to other buyers. When the price of lettuce more than doubled, KGM made a profit by selling to other buyers and not selling to Fresh. Fresh covered by buying elsewhere, but at a loss of approx. $700,000.
Procedural History
Jury determined that KGM breached contract, and the buyer was entitled to $655,906.22 with interest accruing from 30 days before trial. Seller appealed.
Issues
Is Fresh entitled to the damages awarded?
Holding
Yes
Judgment
Affirmed and reversed (damage was increased to add interest starting at the time of the filing of the original complaint).
Reasons
Buyer should be in same position as if contract had been performed on both sides.