Iron Trade Products Co. v. Wilkoff Co.

272 Pa. 172, 116 A.150 (1922).

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The Wilkoff Co. (D) entered into a written contract with Iron Trade Products (P) to supply 2,600 tons of section relaying rails for $41 per ton. D failed to deliver any of the rails, and P brought suit because it had to buy the rails elsewhere at a higher market price. D claims that the price of rails was very limited with only two places in the U.S. (Georgia and West Virginia), where such a demand could be filled. Even though P placed its order with D, P was also buying in the marketplace in large quantities. D claimed that it could not perform because P purchased a similar quantity of like rails from other sellers, thus reducing the available supply of rails and driving up the market price. D failed to aver knowledge on part of P that the supply of rails was limited or any intent on its part to prevent, interfere with or embarrass D in the performance of the contract. Nor was there any suggestion or any understanding, express or implied, that D was to secure the rails from any particular source, or that P was to refrain from purchasing other rails; hence, it was not required to do so. Judgment was rendered to P for the difference of about $8 per ton and D appealed.