Cengage Advantage Books: Fundamentals of Business Law 9th Edition by Roger LeRoy Miller

Exercise 20

Les Entreprises Jacques Defour Fils, Inc. v. Dinsick Equipment Corp.
United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, __ F.Supp.2d __ (2011).
FACTS Les Entreprises Jacques Defour Fils, Inc., is a Canadian corporation in the business of highway construction. Its principal place of business is in Baie-Saint-Paul, Quebec, Canada. Dinsick Equipment Corporation is a U.S. firm that sells new and used industrial equipment from its base of operations in Plainfield, Illinois. Les Entreprises contracted to buy a 30,000-gallon industrial tank from Dinsick and wired the price of $70,000 directly to the seller's bank account. Less than a week later, Dinsick told Les Entreprises that the tank could be picked up in Joplin, Missouri. The buyer paid Xaak Transport, Inc., to pick up the tank, but when Xaak went to Joplin, the tank was not there. Les Entreprises paid Xaak $7,459 for its services and then contacted Dinsick, which agreed to reimburse the $70,000. When Dinsick did not refund the price, however, Les Entreprises filed a suit in a federal district court against the seller.
ISSUE In addition to the contract price, can Les Entreprises (the buyer) recover damages for the amount it paid to a trucking company to pick up goods that Dinsick (the seller) had failed to deliver?
DECISION Yes. The federal district court issued a judgment in favor of Les Entreprises. The judgment included an award of compensatory damages in the amount of $70,000 for the tank and incidental damages of $7,459 for the transport.
REASON To establish a breach of contract, the plaintiff must show (1) an enforceable contract, (2) substantial performance by the nonbreaching party, (3) a breach by the other party, and (4) damages. In this case, Les Entreprises agreed-as evidenced by Dinsick's invoice-to buy an industrial tank. The buyer deposited the funds into the seller's account, which shows substantial performance. Dinsick failed to tender or deliver the tank and later failed to refund the price. These circumstances show that Dinsick breached the contract with Les Entreprises. As for the amount of the damages in addition to the price of the tank, Les Entreprises-on Dinsick's notice that the tank was ready for pickup-paid Xaak to transport it. Because shipping costs were key to the performance of the contract, this was a reasonable expense.
FOR CRITICAL ANALYSIS-Technological Consideration What did the act of wiring the full payment directly to the seller's bankaccount demonstrate? Are there other methods of payment that couldhave accomplished the same purpose? Explain.