Legal Opinion
Alimenta (u.s.a.), Inc. v. Cargill, Incorporated
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided December 8, 1988No. 87-8771PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NESBITT, District Judge:
In July 1980, Alimenta (U.S.A.), Inc. (“Alimenta”) entered into seven contracts with Cargill, Incorporated (“Cargill”) under which Cargill promised to deliver to Ali-menta shelled, edible peanuts. The peanut crops were still in the field at the time the contracts were entered into. Later that summer there was a drought, the severity of which is disputed, which reduced the peanut crop yield.
Due to the decrease in the crop yield, Cargill notified Alimenta that it would proceed under U.C.C. § 2-615, 1 that is, Cargill would allocate deliveries of the 1980 peanut crop…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United States v. NellCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,189 First Virginia Bankshares v. Alan BensonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1977
- Transatlantic Financing Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1966
- Cosden Oil & Chemical Company, Cross-Appellee v. Karl O. Helm Aktiengesellschaft, Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Upsher-Smith Laboratories, Inc. v. Mylan Laboratories, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1996
- Cliffstar Corp. v. Riverbend Products, Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 1990