Supplier, Inc., a large wholesaler, had a contract with Grocery. Supplier sued Grocery for breach of contract when Grocery failed to place an order for goods by a specific date as specified in the contract. Each order was to be worth at least $550. Grocery contended that the contract Bill Green signed was a standard preprinted supply contract without specifics regarding time of order and quantity. Green had authority to sign a standard supply contract, but could not authorize specific terms. This was unknown to Supplier. Supplier argued that the terms were "boilerplate" and could therefore be modified by acceptance. Supplier offered oral testimony at trial to prove that Green agreed to the modifications.
Is there a contract? If so, what are the terms? Explain your answers.
Also, discuss the use of Supplier's oral testimony at trial.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com June 3, 2020, 7:22 pm ad1c9bdddf
We need to assume that Green is an employee of the company. The employer is fully responsible for the agreements signed by Green. There was no communication from Grocery to Supplier that Green was not authorized to sign specific terms. It is the responsibility of Grocery to inform supplier that Green was not authorized to sign specific terms. So, Grocery is fully responsible for the actions of Green.
There was a written contract between the two parties that is Supplier and Grocery and that required Grocery to place an order for goods by a specific date as specified in the contract. The conditions also included that the orders were to be at least $550.
Under these circumstances " the ...