Stroh Brewery Co. v. Grand Trunk Western Railroad Co.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
513 F. Supp. 827 (1981)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
The Stroh Brewery Company (Stroh) (plaintiff) ordered a train carload of malt to use in Stroh’s brewing process. The malt was to be delivered by rail by Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company (Grand Trunk) (defendant). The malt was placed in hopper car number CNW 172379. Around the same time, Rickel Malting Company, Inc. (Rickel) ordered a carload of barley, which was placed in hopper car number CNW 173379. Employees of Grand Trunk mistakenly sent the car of barley intended for Rickel, rather than the car of malt intended for Stroh, in the series of cars sent to Stroh. Stroh’s employees did not notice the mistake, because of the similarity in appearance between the malt and barley. The barley was unloaded and mixed with Stroh’s malt, resulting in contamination of the malt and the burning out of the engines used for grinding. Stroh sued Grand Trunk for breach of contract and sought, as consequential damages, the cost of Stroh’s malt that was contaminated and the cost of removing the contaminated malt from Stroh’s brewing facility.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cook, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 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.