From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...
Sinco, Inc. v. Metro-North Commuter R. Co.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
133 F.Supp. 2d 308 (2001)
Metro-North Commuter Railway Company (Metro-North) (defendant) awarded a contract to Sinco, Inc. (Sinco) (plaintiff) for the manufacture of a fall-protection system at Grand Central Terminal. The system was designed to be a safety mechanism for Metro-North employees who performed work in elevated areas. Sinco’s system incorporated metal sleeves called Sayflinks that connected a worker’s harness to a network of cables. The contract stressed the need for reliability and also gave Sinco an opportunity to cure any breaches within seven days of a notice of default provided by Metro-North. After the system was installed, a Sayflink sleeve crumbled upon inspection by a Metro-North worker. Numerous Sayflinks had similar defects. Thereafter, Metro-North provided Sinco with a notice of default. Two days later, Sinco delivered two types of replacement Sayflink sleeves, some that were only staked and some that were staked and reinforced with welded metal. Sinco also included a videotape of a single stress test performed on one type of Sayflink. Metro-North rejected the replacements as a cure for the defects. At subsequent meetings, Sinco suggested other cures, including offers to pay for an independent firm to evaluate the Sayflinks’ reliability, to perform further tests, and to provide sleeves made by another company. Metro-North rejected Sinco’s suggestions and sent Sinco another notice of default, stating that the contract would be terminated. Following termination, Sinco brought suit against Metro-North for breach of contract. Metro-North counterclaimed. Both parties moved for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Hellerstein, J.)
What to do next…
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.
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 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.