Schutzman v. Lehman

Plaintiff had agreed with certain parties to sell to them certain goods at certain prices, which plaintiff, having qualified as an expert, stated to be the fair and reasonable value of the goods at the time. In order to carry into effect these agreements the plaintiff ordered the desired goods from defendant, who agreed to deliver the same within certain dates. At the time of making such contract with defendant’s agent, plaintiff informed him of these agreements with the third parties. The goods, or a considerable portion thereof, were never delivered by defendant, and plaintiff, after trying in vain to buy the same kind of goods in the market, was unable to complete his agreements with the third parties. The court gave judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

The rule is that, in cases where the vendor fails to deliver the goods, the measure of damages is the difference between the contract price and the market price at the time and place of delivery. In the case at bar, however, there was no market value, inasmuch as plaintiff was unable to procure the goods in the market. The only evidence of the real value of the goods is plaintiff’s testimony that the price at which he agreed to sell them to the third parties was the fair and reasonable value of the goods at the time; i. e., at the time of the agreements with the third parties, but some time prior to the time when the defendant was to deliver the goods. However, defendant had knowledge of the agreements with the third parties, at the time of making the- contract