Great American Music Machine, Inc. v. Mid-South Record Pressing Co.

393 F. Supp. 877 (1975)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Great American Music Machine, Inc. v. Mid-South Record Pressing Co.

United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
393 F. Supp. 877 (1975)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

Singer-songwriter Ralph Harrison (plaintiff) had never performed professionally and was unknown in the entertainment industry when a national sorority adopted one of his songs as its theme song. Friends and associates joined a partnership to promote Harrison and spent $30,000 recording an album, then contracted with Mid-South Record Pressing Company (Mid-South) (defendant) to press 40,000 copies. The parties discussed the venture’s plan to incorporate into Great American Music Machine, Inc. (GrAMM) (plaintiff) and sell stock publicly, and Mid-South assured the partners the record would be high quality. Mid-South was to send 8,000 copies to a record-distribution company and mail the other 32,000 copies directly to sorority members with a letter asking to remit $5 to GrAMM in exchange for $1 toward a sorority service project. GrAMM prepaid the postage for the mailings. Mid-South ran a test pressing that GrAMM approved, started production, and shipped about 8,000 copies to sorority members and 4,000 to the distributor, but the records were defective. Mid-South pressed and mailed another batch. GrAMM accepted the second batch but refused to pay the $13,025 contract price and sued for breach of contract seeking to recover its production, marketing, and carrying costs until GrAMM successfully had a public offering. GrAMM claimed the confusion and delay cost it $500,000 in underwriting a brokerage firm had pledged toward GrAMM securities, but the evidence did not show why the underwriting fell through. Mid-South had a record-company president and a disc jockey testify that the album was not particularly good and had little market potential, even with a high-quality first pressing. GrAMM offered no reliable evidence as to market potential.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Morton, 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 744,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 744,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 744,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership