Southern Stone Co. v. Singer
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
665 F.2d 698 (1982)
- Written by Stephanie Yu, JD
Facts
Southern Stone Company (Southern Stone) (plaintiff) sold limestone rock to S&M Materials Company (S&M). S&M never paid Southern Stone for the limestone rock. Subsequently, S&M went out of business. Prior to S&M closing down, Thomas Moore (defendant), one of S&M’s officers, directors, and shareholders, started his own corporation, TM, Inc. (TM). Unable to collect on the money owed from S&M, Southern Stone attempted to seek payment from Moore. About a year after S&M was dissolved, Southern Stone sent Moore a letter stating that Moore had made several statements about his past dealings with S&M. The end of the note requested that Moore respond to the letter if anything in the letter was incorrect. Moore never responded. Southern Stone sued Moore and other officers, directors, and shareholders of the defunct S&M (defendants) in district court for the funds owed from S&M. The letter to Moore was introduced at trial to show that Moore had made an adoptive admission as to the contents of the letter because he failed to respond to the letter. Southern Stone did not introduce evidence showing that any issue in the letter was discussed with Moore in person. Moore testified that at the time he received the letter, he was no longer involved with S&M and thus felt no need to respond. The letter was admitted as an adoptive admission. The jury found against Moore. Moore appealed based on the admission of the letter.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Anderson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 829,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.