Bobby Murray Chevrolet, Inc., contracted to supply 1,200 school bus chassis to local school boards.
View the step-by-step solution to:

Question

Bobby Murray Chevrolet, Inc., contracted to supply 1,200 school bus chassis to local school boards. The contract

stated that "products of any manufacturer may be offered," but Bobby Murray submitted its orders exclusively to General Motors Corp. (GMC). When a shortage in automatic transmissions occurred, GMC informed the dealer that it could not fill the orders. Bobby Murray told the school boards, which then bought the chassis from another dealer. The boards filed a suit in a North Carolina state court against Bobby Murray for breach of contract. The dealer responded that its obligation to perform was excused under the doctrine of commercial impracticability, in part because of GMC's failure to fill its orders.

Should Bobby Murray be excused from its obligations?

What factors should the court consider in making its decision in this case?

How does the doctrine of commercial impracticability attempt to balance the rights of both parties to a contract?

Top Answer

Sign up to view the full answer

Why Join Course Hero?

Course Hero has all the homework and study help you need to succeed! We’ve got course-specific notes, study guides, and practice tests along with expert tutors.

-

Educational Resources
  • -

    Study Documents

    Find the best study resources around, tagged to your specific courses. Share your own to gain free Course Hero access.

    Browse Documents
  • -

    Question & Answers

    Get one-on-one homework help from our expert tutors—available online 24/7. Ask your own questions or browse existing Q&A threads. Satisfaction guaranteed!

    Ask a Question