Critical Thinking Cases Busn 420 Essay

761 Words Jul 31st, 2015 4 Pages
BUSN 420
Chapter-End Critical Thinking Cases
Professor Mitchell Levin
DeVry University
August 8, 2015

16.1 Specific Performance
Can C&H recover the liquidated damages from Sun Ship? Yes C&H can recover liquidated damages from Sun Ship. C&H had contracted with Sun Ship to deliver a barge on June 30, 1981 they also went under contract with Halter to deliver the tug on April 30, 1981 to the ship yard of Sun Ship. Both entities breached their contract as they failed to deliver by the dates in the contract. Halter completed the tug July 15, 1982 and Sun Ship completed the barge March 16, 1982 and delivery to C&H was in July 1982 they were both more than a year late on the contracted agreement.
By having the force
…show more content…
Hector filed a lawsuit to recover damages under Article 2 of the UCC; she had a pacemaker installed that was defective. Cedars-Sinai insists this was a service and not a sale of goods. This is appropriate as the hospital does not manufacture nor select and test the pacemakers. There would be no way to hold Cedars-Sinai liable under the UCC for goods sold.
The hospitals or the doctors are not in the business of selling anything except the services they provide. Dr. Kompaniez was merely the person performing the services of surgery and putting in the pacemaker; he received the pacemaker and simply put the unit into Ms. Hector. The hospital and the Dr. would have been liable if there was some sort of malpractice or impropriety on their parts but this was not the case nor was this what the lawsuit suggested.
Strict liability is not applicable in this case due to them only providing services and not being the seller of any products. The court granted partial summary judgement and dismissed the case and as it worked its way through to the court of appeals the same outcome was upheld.
The appeals court determined that the trial court did not err in its previous judgement of granting the motion for partial summary judgement ( Ms. Hector would not be victorious in her pursuit of a legal remedy for the defective pacemaker that she received during the heart operation. Ms. Hectors maybe would have been better served suing the manufacture of the pacemaker

Related Documents