Rardin v. T & D Machine Handling, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
890 F.2d 24 (1989)
![SC](https://quimbee-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/educator/photo/11/Sean_Carroll.webp)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Jack Rardin (plaintiff) bought a printing press from Whitacre-Sunbelt, Inc. The purchase price included the cost of transport. The sales contract stated that Whitacre was responsible for any damages to the press resulting from the actions of Whitacre’s employees, agents, or contractors. Whitacre hired T & D Machine Handling, Inc. (defendant) to take apart the press and load it for transport. In carrying out this task, T & D negligently damaged the press. As a result of the damage and time for repair, Rardin could not put the press into use as early as he planned. Rardin settled any claims he had against Whitacre. Rardin also sued T & D for his lost profits. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim. Rardin appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.