Auto Parts Vs Auto Zone Case Study

After reading this case anyone would say that the ABC Auto Parts and Auto Zone Co. didn’t entered into a proper written agreement and neither of them signed any legal contract. So, it’s a clear indication that there no legal contract signed by both parties. Furthermore, a presentation by ABC of its good at Auto Zone premises and Auto Zone places an order verbally, it doesn’t create a valid contract when the contract amount is more than $500. So, if ABC brings a lawsuit against the Auto Zone than Auto Zone as a buyer in their defense may raise this question; one, there no contract has been signed and two there no place of delivery determined by both party. However, for ABC this is not a lost cause because, after their meeting, ABC did send Auto
But ABC can argue that yes, the place of delivery been determine under the UCC especially if it is absence in the contract. Under UCC Sec. 2-308 Sec. (a) “absence of a specific place of delivery” it clearly stated that a place of delivery of goods is the seller place of business or if seller has none then seller residence. Besides, ABC can apply “anticipated repudiation” under UCC Sec. 2-610 Subd. [a and b] where ABC as an aggrieved party may wait for a reasonable time or resort for remedy for the breach of contract. By applying this code ABC can make their case stronger against Auto Zone.
When it comes to damages ABC can receive damage from Auto Zone. ABC can obtain it by applying the UCC Sec. 2-708 “seller damages for non-acceptance or repudiation”. All that ABC need is to provide a proof of market price and the measure of damage would be the difference among the market price at the time off non-acceptance and the unpaid contract price together with any incidental damages. So, we know that after 90 day the price of those goods went down from $150 each to $125, a fall in the price of $25 and the total damage of (500 X $25) $12500; plus, incidental