Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Universal Computer Systems v. Medical Services Association of Pennsylvania

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
628 F.2d 820 (1980)


Facts

Medical Services Association of Pennsylvania (Blue Shield) (defendant) sought bids for the lease of a computer. Blue Shield employee, Joel Gebert, acted as a liaison between all of the prospective bidders and Blue Shield. The deadline for the submission of bids was August 18, 1975. Universal Computer System (Universal) (plaintiff) contacted Gebert and asked if he would pick up Universal’s bid from the airport on the day that bids were due. Gebert said yes and then on August 18 when Universal’s bid arrived at the airport, Gebert informed Universal that he would no longer be able to pick it up. Universal subsequently lost the contract with Blue Shield and sued for breach based on a theory of promissory estoppel. The jury found for Universal and awarded damages of $13,000. Blue Shield filed a motion for judgment non obstante veredicto (n.o.v.) and a motion for a new trial. The court granted Blue Shield’s motion for judgment n.o.v. stating that the jury could not have found that Universal reasonably relied on Gebert’s authority to make any promises because the bidding invitation was subject to federal regulations. However, the trial court denied the motion for a new trial stating that the jury’s damage award was reasonable. Universal appealed the court’s grant of the motion for judgment n.o.v. and Blue Shield cross-appealed the court’s denial of their motion for a new trial.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Rosenn, 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, please start your free trial or log in.

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 202,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.