George H. Swatek, Inc. v. North Star Graphics

587 A.2d 629 (1991)

Facts

In February 1986, D and P entered into a contract under which P was to supply D with shipping containers. P delivered the first 10,000 containers and D paid for them without complaint. In April D requested that P recut the delivered containers so D could ship the containers by United Parcel Service. After recutting the containers, P delivered them, along with an additional quantity, to D. D accepted and paid for these containers. D later learned that the containers did not meet United Parcel Service's strength standards. P developed a protective cushion that enabled the containers to meet the specifications. In mid-April 1986, P and D agreed that P would supply defendant with approximately 32,000 cushions. P testified that the parties did not set a delivery date. D believed that the cushions were to be shipped by April 28, 1986. P started shipping the cushions in mid-May 1986 and continued shipping the cushions until early June 1986. The shipments arrived too late for D to meet its obligations with its customers, D shipped the containers by air using other packaging materials. D refused to pay for the cushions. P sued and D counterclaimed for breach of contract, negligent performance of the contract and fraud. At the end of the case, P moved for a directed verdict at least for the amount requested in the complaint. The trial court stated that the only issue in the case is whether there should be a set off for the breach of contract alleged in the counterclaim, or if -- or if it exceeds the amount of $38,000 whether there should be judgment in favor of D on the counterclaim. The trial court thereupon framed the first two jury questions as follows: 1. Did defendant Swatek agree to manufacture and deliver the 'corner' sets to defendant North Star Graphics, Inc. within a specified time? Yes, ___ No ___. 2. If not, did plaintiff Swatek manufacture and deliver the 'corner' sets within a reasonable time? Yes, ___ No ___. The jury answered 'no' to the first question and 'yes' to the second question. P got the verdict. This appeal followed.