Mueller v. McGill

In December 1985, Rick Mueller (plaintiff) entered into a contract with Don McGill; Don McGill, Inc.; Don McGill Imports, Inc.; and Greg Radford (collectively, McGill Inc.) (defendants) for the purchase of a 1985 Porsche 911 Targa. After negotiating the terms and applying for financing for the vehicle, Mueller was informed by a McGill Inc. employee that the specific vehicle he had contracted to purchase was already under contract with another customer and that Mueller’s agreement was a backup contract. Despite McGill Inc.’s assurances that it was unlikely the other customer would be able to finance the vehicle, when Mueller came the next day to pick up the vehicle he was informed that it had been sold. McGill Inc. agreed to find a replacement for the vehicle and to sell it to Mueller under the same terms, but it was unable to find another 1985 Porsche 911 Targa. In February 1986, a new sales manager for McGill Inc. contacted Mueller, explained that the previous contract would not be honored, and offered to sell a 1986 Porsche 911 Targa to Mueller, but at a higher price and for a lower trade-in value for Mueller’s current vehicle. Mueller made attempts to find a 1985 Porsche at competing dealerships but was unable to do so. In April 1986, Mueller purchased a 1986 Porsche 911 Targa from a competing dealership for a higher price and with a lower trade-in value for his previous vehicle. The 1986 model of Porsche 911 Targa was almost identical to the 1985 models, but it was more expensive. Mueller sued for breach of contract, requesting damages for the difference in price that he had to pay. The trial judge directed a verdict in favor of McGill Inc., finding that Mueller had not provided evidence proving that he had suffered damages because the 1986 Porsche was not suitable cover for the 1985 Porsche. Mueller appealed.