Explore BrainMass

Explore BrainMass

    Case Study, Appellate Ruling in Johnson vs MFA

    Not what you're looking for? Search our solutions OR ask your own Custom question.

    This content was COPIED from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

    Rush Johnson Farms Inc. v. Missouri Farms Association, 555 S.W.2d 61. Identify the Facts, Issue, Holding, Reasoning and Disposition.

    © BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com March 5, 2021, 1:22 am ad1c9bdddf


    Solution Preview


    Rush Johnson Farms, Inc. sold soybeans to the Missouri Farmers Association, Inc. (MFA) for $4094.60. The MFA said the contract was for 6000 bushels of soybeans and that Johnson had not delivered that number of bushels. The amount withheld represented the damages to MFA according to their response. Johnson said the contract was not specific as to the quantity of soybeans to be delivered. It was an oral contract. Under Missouri law, the amount involved was more than $500 and was no in writing, signed by him, therefore it could not be proven.

    MFA stated that Johnson was a merchant and that within the code, the contract was admissible under Missouri law.

    The court had to decide (first by a jury instructed by the court) if there was an indebtedness to the Rush Johnson Farms, Inc. Also, it must determine if there was a contract for 6000 bushels. Last, the jury/court had to decide if MFA had paid for all the beans delivered by Johnson, as per the contract.

    The jury found in favor of MFA. On appeal, the court could only consider matters of a technical type, such as definitions and instructions to the jury. In this case, only one question was preserved by Johnson and that was on the status of merchant as it pertained to Rush Johnson Farms, Inc. His contention was that he was a farmer, not a merchant. He owned farms in two counties in Missouri. If he is not legally considered a merchant, but a farmer, then the oral contract would need proof. The fact that Johnson filed the suit in the name of the corporation was not viable because they transaction was not in the name of the corporation, by ...

    Solution Summary

    A review of the appellate ruling in Rush Johnson Farms, Inc, vs the Missouri Farmers Association (MFA).