Brief Associated Builders v. William Coggins

Brief Associated Builders v. William Coggins - interest...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Cameron Hartman 10/27/09 Seat #59 ASSOCIATED BUILDERS, INC. v. WILLIAM M. COGGINS ET AL. Facts: Associated Builders, Inc. (Associated) provided services to William Coggins (Coggins)to complete a structure. A dispute arose, thus Associated and Coggins executed an agreement stating that a balance of $70,005.54 had accrued. The terms of repayment are summarized as follows: two payments of $25,000 will be made by Coggins on June 1, 1996, and June 1, 1997, with no interest if paid within those terms (10% interest if not paid within those terms). If the previous payments are made within those terms, the remaining $20,005.54 balance will be forfeited. The previous agreement was made, and Coggins made the first payment as planned; however, the second payment arrived three days late. Associated thusly claimed a breach of contract and demanded the $20,005.54 balance, plus
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: interest. History: The superior court gave summary judgment in favor of the defendant, Coggins. Issue: Did the Cogginses’ late payment represent a material breach of the accord? Decision: No, the superior court’s decision was affirmed. Reasons: A material breach is defined as “a nonperformance of a duty that is so material and important as to justify the injured party in regarding the whole transaction as at an end.” The court found that the previous definition was not satisfied in this case. The restatement lists five factors as significant in determining whether an action is important enough to be a material breach; time of performance is one factor. As a result, the court found that a three-day delay was not a material breach....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online