King Aircraft Sales, Inc. v. Lane
Court of Appeals of Washington
68 Wash. App. 706, 846 P.2d 550 (1993)
- Written by Jayme Weber, JD
Facts
King Aircraft Sales, Inc., doing business as King Aviation Services (King) (plaintiff), offered to buy two “quality, no damage” airplanes from Joe Lane Jr., doing business as The Lane Company, and Lane Aviation, Inc. (Lane) (defendants). King intended to resell the planes for a profit. After Lane accepted King’s offer, Lane proposed to sell the planes to King “as is” instead. King did not accept this proposal, and Lane backed out of the original agreement. King sued Lane in equity for specific performance. Before the trial, however, Lane sold the planes to a third party, which resold the planes at a profit. The trial court found that although the planes were not truly unique, King could not cover because the planes’ outstanding condition was so rare. The trial court held that the other-proper-circumstances provision of Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) § 2-716 applied, and awarded King the amount that the third party had made on the resale. Lane appealed, arguing that a damages award was improper in a suit for specific performance. Lane also argued that § 2-716 did not apply because King had not shown an inability to cover based on the lack of a remedy at law, given that King had rejected Lane’s proposal to sell the planes as is. King cross-appealed, arguing that King should have received the blue-book value of the planes instead of the resale profit at the time of trial.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pekelis, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.