Raw Materials, Inc. v. Manfred Forberich GmbH & Co.
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
2004 WL 1535839 (2004)
- Written by Lauren Petersen, JD
Facts
Raw Materials, Inc. (Raw Materials) (plaintiff) purchased used railroad rails and resold them to be recycled into fence and sign posts. Raw Materials entered into a contract to purchase 15,000 to 18,000 metric tons of rail from Manfred Forberich GmbH & Co. (Forberich) (defendant). Forberich planned to get the used rails from Russia, and agreed to deliver the Russian rails to Illinois by June 30, 2002. In June, Forberich asked Raw Materials for an extension. The parties negotiated a new deadline of December 31, 2002. But the winter of 2002 was the coldest St. Petersburg had experienced in 60 years. By December, the St. Petersburg port had frozen over, trapping even the ice breakers. No ships could leave the port for months. As a result, Forberich neither loaded nor delivered the rails by December 31, 2002. Raw Materials sued Forberich for breach of contract and fraud, moving for summary judgment on the breach of contract claim. Forberich raised the defense of force majeure. Specifically, Forberich claimed the frozen port was an unforeseeable event that made it impossible for Forberich to meet the contractual deadline, and, therefore, that Forberich was excused from meeting that deadline.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Filip, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.
