Wiki Law School will soon be moving! Please update your bookmarks. Our future address is www.wikilawschool.org |
Pennsy v. American Ash
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Redirected from Pennsy Supply, Inc. v. American Ash Recycling Corp. of Pennsylvania)
Pennsy v. American Ash | |
Court | Pennsylvania Superior Court |
---|---|
Citation | 895 A.2d 595 |
Date decided | March 17, 2006 |
Facts
- Lobar, Inc. = "Lobar" = contractor that won a contract to a school construction site in York County, Pennsylvania
- Pennsy Supply, Inc. = "Pennsy" = plaintiff = sub-contractor of Lobar
- The sub-contract required Pennsy to use a base aggregate which could be AggRite
- American Ash Recycling Corp. of Pennsylvania = "American Ash" = defendant = supplier of AggRite for free = a recycling company trying to rid itself of garbage
- Pennsy took 11,000 tons of AggRite from American Ash & used it in the paving work
- Pennsy completed the paving for the school in December 2001
- Within 2 months, the pavement was already cracking!
- Pennsy agreed to removed AggRite (which is a hazardous material [hazmat]) at no cost to the school
- For us here, we can equate "AggRite" with garbage, trash, waste, & a hazmat
- American Ash declined to dispose of the removed AggRite
- Pennsy incurred significant costs in the removal & disposal of the AggRite (which wasn't needed in the 1st place)
Procedural History
- Pennsy sued American Ash in Pennsylvania state court alleging breach of contract.
- The state court dismissed Pennsy's complaint.
- The trial court ruled that there was no consideration between Pennsy & American Ash. Thus, there was no enforceable contract.
- The trial court ruled that the AggRite was a gift (albeit useful & troublesome) from American Ash to Pennsy.
- In other words, Pennsy lost.
Issues
Is there sufficient consideration to enforce a contract even if the parties haven't bargained for all of the contract's terms?
Holding
Yes. If an un-bargained-for condition (the contract requirement to use AggRite) would benefit the promisor (American Ash) at a detriment to the promisee (Pennsy), then there's sufficient consideration to enforce the contract.
Judgment
Reversed