Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
  • G
  • Gardner Zemke Co. v. Dunham Bush, Inc.Gardner Zemke Co. v. Dunham Bush, Inc.
From our private database of 16,800+ case briefs...

Gardner Zemke Co. v. Dunham Bush, Inc.

New Mexico Supreme Court
850 P.2d 319 (1993)

Gardner Zemke Co. v. Dunham Bush, Inc.


Gardner Zemke Co. (Gardner) (plaintiff) was a general contractor awarded a large contract from the Department of Energy (DOE). Gardner awarded a subcontract to Dunham Bush, Inc. (Dunham) (defendant) to supply air-conditioning units for the DOE project. Gardner sent a purchase order requesting the goods to Dunham, and Dunham replied with an acknowledgement form containing substantial warranty disclaimers. The acknowledgement form also contained a provision that silence by Gardner would be interpreted as acquiescence to the new agreement. Gardner and Dunham went forward with the transaction without resolving discrepancies between the purchase order and the acknowledgement form. Gardner alleged that the goods provided by Dunham did not conform to its specifications, and thus Gardner was required to pay additional installation costs for the nonconforming goods. A few months after the air-conditioners were installed, DOE complained to Gardner that two were not working properly. Gardner requested examination of the units by Dunham, but Dunham refused to provide this service unless DOE issued an additional purchase order expressing willingness to pay for Dunham’s services if the air-conditioners were found to not be problematic. DOE did not issue another purchase order, but instead chose an independent contractor to repair the two air-conditioners. DOE then withheld $20,000 from Gardner’s contract to cover the cost of repairs. Gardner brought suit against Dunham to recover this money, and the trial court ruled for Dunham on the ground that its acknowledgement form disclaiming warranty operated as a counteroffer which was accepted by Gardner. Gardner appealed.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Franchini, 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 449,000 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 449,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 16,800 briefs, keyed to 224 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