Logourl black
From our private database of 13,000+ case briefs...

Schenectady Steel Co., Inc. v. Bruno Trimpoli General Const. Co., Inc.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division
350 N.Y.S.2d 920 (1974)


Facts

Bruno Trimpoli General Construction Co., Inc. (Construction Co.) (defendant) agreed on May 8, 1968 to construct a bridge for the State of New York by December 31, 1969. Construction Co. then contracted with Schenectady Steel Co., Inc. (Steel Co.) (plaintiff) to provide and erect the steel for the bridge. The parties’ contract stated that “time is of the essence” and that Steel Co. would complete the work in 1968. Because of various difficulties of which Construction Co. was aware, Steel Co. was unable to complete the work by the end of 1968. In January and February 1969, Construction Co. sent two letters to Steel Co. demanding that it provide a delivery schedule or risk Construction Co. going with an alternative supplier and charging Steel Co. for any additional cost. Steel Co. pledged to work quickly but did not provide a delivery schedule. On March 1, 1969, the president of Construction Co. visited Steel Co.’s facility and was disappointed with the lack of progress. On March 5, Construction Co. cancelled the contract. Steel Co. sued to recover the value of the work it performed; Construction Co. countersued for damages. After a non-jury trial, the trial court found in favor of Construction Co., applying the Uniform Commercial Code. Steel Co. appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Reynolds, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Concurrence (Greenblott, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Concurrence/Dissent (Cooke, J.)

The concurrence/dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the judge’s concurrence in part and dissent in part. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 128,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,000 briefs, keyed to 176 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.