Corono-Oro, Inc. v. Harry Thompson
California Court of Appeal
2002 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2501 (2002)
Facts
Corono-Oro, Inc. (Corono) (plaintiff) was an office-furniture reseller owned by Stewart Hollenback. Harry Thompson (defendant) was a furniture broker. Corono sued Thompson for breaching a contract to sell workstations. According to the testimony of Hollenback and Corono sales representative Mark Dalton, Corono was looking for 76 workstations for a customer. Hollenback, Dalton, and the customer went to view workstations being sold by Radius. At Radius, Thompson was inventorying workstations and said he was brokering cubicles for Radius. Dalton told Thompson Corono wanted 76 workstations and would give Thompson a deposit. Dalton delivered a check to Thompson’s office and asked for a receipt. Dalton received an invoice that listed 76 workstations at $1,000 each and 76 chairs at $75 each. The invoice also included sales tax and acknowledged receipt of a deposit. Dalton circled the sales tax and told Thompson there should be no sales tax because the product was being resold. The invoice indicated to Dalton that Corono had a contract to purchase the workstations. The following week, Thompson stated there might be a delay in getting the workstations. When Dalton stopped by, Thompson said he was waiting to hear from Radius and returned Corono’s check. The next day, Thompson told Dalton the workstations were not available. In trial testimony that conflicted with that of Hollenback and Dalton, Thompson maintained that he clearly expressed he did not have title to the workstations. The court entered judgment for Corono. Thompson appealed, arguing there was insufficient evidence that a contract existed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mihara, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 710,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.