This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

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.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.