Situation Management Systems, Inc. v. Malouf, Inc.
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
724 N.E.2d 699 (2000)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Situation Management Systems, Inc. (SMS) (plaintiff) sold training materials. Malouf, Inc., doing business as LMA, Inc. (LMA) (defendant), was an agent of SMS and sold SMS’s products. SMS and LMA had three agency agreements over the years, all with substantially the same terms. At one point, between contracts, the parties continued doing business together without having a contract in place. Malouf had several discussions with SMS president Earl Rose about LMA purchasing another SMS agent, The Kasten Company (Kasten), but repeatedly told Rose that he needed a five-year commitment with SMS before he could commit to purchasing Kasten. Alex Moore, SMS’s chairman, and Rose told Malouf that SMS was committed to a five-year contract with LMA. Based on those statements, Malouf negotiated an agreement to purchase Kasten. SMS later sent a contract to LMA that contained significant changes from past contracts. The parties were unable to agree on the terms, and their existing contract expired. SMS sued LMA for payment for the training materials, and LMA counterclaimed for breach of contract. The parties settled SMS’s claim. The trial jury found that SMS had promised a five-year commitment to LMA and that LMA had suffered $3.8 million in damages consisting of lost profits. SMS appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ireland, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 789,000 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.