Eldesouky v. Aziz
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
2015 WL 1573319 (2015)
- Written by Sarah Holley, JD
Facts
Eldesouky and Abbas (plaintiffs) entered into a contract with General Trade Corporation, Inc. and Aziz (defendants) for the purchase of 2,000 metric tons of flaxseed at $420 per metric ton. Pursuant to the contract, Eldesouky and Abbas were responsible for 85 percent of the total cost of purchase, and Aziz was responsible for the remainder. Eldesouky and Abbas later discovered that Aziz had contracted with Richardson International Ltd. to purchase 4,000 metric tons of flaxseed at $660 per metric ton and, further, that Aziz had paid Richardson using a portion of the monies that Eldesouky and Abbas had paid to him on their original contract. Eldesouky and Abbas then contracted with Richardson to purchase the same amount of flaxseed as Aziz and on the same terms, and Richardson in turn agreed to credit whatever monies it received from Aziz toward this new contract. Aziz never transferred to Richardson the remaining amount Eldesouky and Abbas had paid to him on their original contract, nor did Eldesouky and Abbas ever receive the flaxseed contracted for with General Trade and Aziz. Ultimately, Eldesouky and Abbas only received and paid for 1,981 of the 4,000 metric tons under the contract with Richardson. During shipment, Richardson charged Eldesouky and Abbas storage fees for the flaxseed. And whatever flaxseed Eldesouky and Abbas were able to resell was at a loss due to its poor quality. The court entered judgment in favor of Eldesouky and Abbas on their breach-of-contract claim. The court then considered the damages to which Eldesouky and Abbas were entitled.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cott, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 779,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.