Appellant supplier challenged the order of the Superior Court of Imperial County (California) that granted respondent beekeeper’s motion for a nonsuit in the supplier’s action for breach of contract.
California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. has a template for a Breach of Contract demand letter
The beekeeper argued that the evidence did not show any breach of the agreement on the beekeeper’s part and that the supplier’s cause of action was barred by the statute of limitations at Cal. Civ. Proc. Code ยง 337. The court disagreed with both contentions and reversed. The court discussed the evidence and the inferences reasonably supported by it and found that the inference that the beekeeper was the first party to breach the contract was not unreasonable but was, instead, one that reasonable men would be warranted in deducing from all the evidence. Thus, the court found that the evidence afforded no basis for the first ground of the beekeeper’s motion. The court addressed the statute of limitations argument and determined that the supplier was not required to bring suit immediately upon becoming aware of the beekeeper’s breach but could, instead, wait until the beekeeper’s final performance was due. The court found that the supplier’s suit was brought within the permitted time frame when measured against this standard and, thus, that there was no basis for the second ground of the beekeeper’s motion.
The trial court’s grant of the beekeeper’s motion for a nonsuit was reversed.
*
Be the first to comment.