This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: 175 C HAPTER 22 P ERFORMANCE AND B REACH OF S ALES AND L EASE C ONTRACTS A NSWERS TO Q UESTIONS AT THE E NDS OF THE C ASES CASE 22.1(PAGE 441) WHAT IF THE FACTS WERE DIFFERENT? Suppose that the court had ruled in the plaintiffs favor. How might that rul- ing have affected the plaintiffs contracts with other parties? The actual out- come of the case meant that Maple Farms had to fulfill all of its contracts with other school districts. Had the court decided in Maple Farm favor, however, the company might have been able to successfully renegotiate the terms of its contracts with the other parties. CASE 22.2(PAGE 449) WHAT IF THE FACTS WERE DIFFERENT? If Bobbs had delivered the piano in new condition and Jauregui had refused to pay for it only out of buyers remorse, what might the outcome in this case have been different? In these circumstances, the buyer would have breached the parties contract. If the piano had not been returned and was still in the buyers possession, the seller could sue for the purchase price or reclaim the goods. In either case, the seller might also sue for damages, which would ordinarily be the difference between the contract price and the market price at the time and place of tender, plus incidental damages. THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT DIMENSION What might a buyer who prevails in a dispute such as the one in this case be awarded in addition to the contract price with interest? Possibilities include the amount of any sales tax, delivery charges, attorneys fees, and court costs, including those to prosecute the appeal. Also, as occurred in the Jauregui case, the seller could be ordered to repossess the goods at its expense. 176 UNIT FOUR: DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL SALES AND LEASE CONTRACTS CASE 22.3QUESTIONS (PAGE 452) 1A. Suppose that Fitl and Strek had included in their deal a clause requiring Fitl to give notice of any defect in the card within 7 days to 1 month of its receipt. Would the result have been different? Why or why not? Possibly. The parties to a sale of lease contract can insert such a provision, which can be enforceable. Of course, in that situation, Fitl might have acted quicker, and the defect might then have been discovered sooner. 2A What might a buyer who prevails in a dispute such as the one in this case be awarded? Fitl paid Strek $17,750 for a 1952 Mickey Mantle Topps baseball card. In the suit against Strek, Fitl asked for damages in the amount of the current fair market value of an unaltered version of the same card. The trial court awarded Fitl the contract price of the card$17,750and the costs to maintain the suit. The state supreme court affirmed the amount of this award on appeal....
View Full Document