From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...
Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co. v. Brookhaven Manor Water Co.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
532 F.2d 572 (1976)
Facts
Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co. (PMD) (plaintiff) is a manufacturer of steel and steel structures. PMD submitted a proposal to construct a steel tank for Brookhaven Manor Water Co. (Brookhaven) (defendant) for a price of $175,000. PMD requested progress payments throughout construction, with the final purchase price due from Brookhaven before PMD completed construction of the tank. Brookhaven rejected this proposal. Brookhaven and PMD ultimately agreed that the purchase price would be due from Brookhaven to PMD within 30 days of PMD’s completion of the tank. After beginning performance, PMD sought written assurances from Brookhaven that it had the entire $175,000 available and waiting in escrow to be paid to PMD. Brookhaven did not have this money available, but was not obligated under the contract to tender the money to PMD until 30 days after PMD completed the tank. When PMD failed to obtain written assurances that Brookhaven presently possessed and was holding the $175,000, PMD terminated performance of the tank construction project. PMD brought suit in federal district court against Brookhaven, claiming that Brookhaven improperly repudiated the contract by failing to provide written assurances to PMD. Brookhaven counterclaimed for damages from PMD’s repudiation. The trial court awarded damages to Brookhaven, and PMD appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pell, J.)
Concurrence (Cummings, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 519,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 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.
