Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
From our private database of 16,300+ case briefs...

Florafax International, Inc. v. GTE Market Resources, Inc.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
933 P.2d 282 (1997)

Florafax International, Inc. v. GTE Market Resources, Inc.


Florafax International, Inc. (Florafax) (plaintiff) is a company that handles the placement and receipt of orders between florists. Florafax additionally enters into agreements with companies that sell floral arrangements, agreeing to handle communication with customers regarding orders for the arrangements. Florafax entered into such an agreement with Bellarose Floral, Inc. d/b/a Flora Plenty (Bellarose) in October 1989 (the Bellarose contract). Bellarose had been in business for about 16 years and received 100,000-200,000 orders annually, a number that was increasing. The agreement provided that Florafax would be paid a fee per order. The contract term was for one year, but would be automatically renewed on a month-to-month basis. Additionally, the agreement provided that either party could terminate the agreement upon 60 days written notice. Two weeks later, Florafax subcontracted out certain portions of the Bellarose contract to GTE Market Resources, Inc. (GTE) (defendant). GTE agreed to handle calls for floral orders, including those for Bellarose, for which it would be provided a fee (the GTE contract). Prior to entering into the contract, GTE did a market analysis that showed that GTE would not make a profit from its contract with Florafax. GTE entered into the contract despite this information. A termination clause in the GTE contract provided that GTE would pay Florafax consequential damages and lost profits should it breach the contract or provide notice of termination of the contract for any reason. GTE was aware of that it was providing services as a subcontractor on the Bellarose contract and was aware of the extent of Bellarose’s orders. From December 1989 through Valentine’s Day of 1990, GTE had difficulties fulfilling its obligations under the contract. These difficulties worsened by Mother’s Day of 1990. Bellarose terminated its agreement with Florafax in July of 1990. Bellarose’s president stated that he considered the contract with Florafax to be a long-term thing, but terminated the agreement due to GTE’s poor performance. Florafax terminated its agreement with GTE. Florafax filed suit, seeking lost profits from the termination of the Bellarose contract. The jury determined that Florafax was entitled to recover lost profits. GTE appealed to the Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Lavender, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 370,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 16,300 briefs, keyed to 223 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.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial