Malnove Inc. of Nebraska v. Hearthside Baking Co.

944 F. Supp. 657, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20011, 1996 WL 635193
CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois
DecidedOctober 31, 1996
Docket95 C 4861
StatusPublished

This text of 944 F. Supp. 657 (Malnove Inc. of Nebraska v. Hearthside Baking Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Malnove Inc. of Nebraska v. Hearthside Baking Co., 944 F. Supp. 657, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20011, 1996 WL 635193 (N.D. Ill. 1996).

Opinion

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

MORTON DENLOW, United States Magistrate Judge.

The Court conducted a two-day bench trial on October 21 and 22, 1996. The Court has considered the testimony of the four witnesses called to testify, Patrick Buckley, Terry Cohen, Wayne Cohen and Patrick Mur-nane, has reviewed the exhibits introduced into evidence, has studied the legal authorities cited by the parties in their written submissions and has listened to the fine closing arguments of counsel. The Court enters the following findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

I.THE PARTIES

1. Plaintiff Malnove Incorporated of Nebraska, d/b/a Malnove Incorporated (“Mal-nove”) is a Nebraska corporation with its principal place of business in Omaha, Nebraska. Malnove is engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling printed folded cartons.

2. Defendant Hearthside Baking Co., Inc., d/b/a Maurice Lenell Cooky Company (“Maurice Lenell”), is an Illinois corporation with its principal place of business in Chicago, Illinois, engaged in the business of manufacturing, packaging and selling bakery goods. In connection with its business, Maurice Lenell purchases millions of printed folding cartons per year to package the cookies it manufactures.

II.JURISDICTION AND YENUE

3. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), because there is complete diversity of citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds $50,-000.00, exclusive of interest and costs. Venue lies in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a).

III.THE MERITS

4. This dispute involves two claims by Malnove arising out of two orders by Maurice Lenell to purchase printed folding cartons to package its cookies. The first claim involves the amounts remaining due and owing on the delivery of 250,000 printed folding cartons known as 20 oz. Family Favorite boxes (“Family Favorite claim”). The second claim involves the amounts remaining due and owing on the order of 500,000 printing folded cartons known as 20 oz. Pinwheel Cookie boxes (“Pinwheel claim”). Illinois substantive law governs this dispute.

A. FAMILY FAVORITE CLAIM

5. The parties entered into a contract for the manufacture and sale by Malnove of 250,000 Family Favorite boxes pursuant to Maurice Lenell purchase order No. 30658 dated October 29, 1993 (Px 2), and Malnove acknowledgment No. 16860 dated November 4, 1993 and executed by Terry Cohen on behalf of Maurice Lenell on November 12, 1993. (Px 3). Pursuant to this contract, Malnove manufactured and delivered all 250,000 of the Family Favorite boxes.

6. Maurice Lenell has paid for all of the Family Favorite boxes, except for the final shipment of 30,000 boxes which were invoiced in the amount of $4,140.00 on January 31, 1995 pursuant to invoice No. 93577. (Px 4).

7. Maurice Lenell seeks to justify its refusal to pay for the final shipment by claim *659 ing that the purchase price included purchase of the dies and printing plates used in the production of the Family Favorite boxes. Maurice Lenell claims that the value of the dies and printing plates was $836.00. (Dx 12). Maurice Lenell claims that in the negotiations leading up to the issuance of its purchase order, Malnove advised Maurice Lenell that the price quotes include “all printing plates and cutting dies necessary to duplicate these cartons.” (Dx 9). In the industry, there are two basic ways to charge for printing plates and dies: first, as a separate extra charge or second, to amortize the cost over the price of the production run. In neither event is it customary for the purchaser to receive the printing plates and dies. The Court finds that the purchase order did not contemplate or expressly include the purchase by Maurice Lenell of the printing plates and dies. (Px 2). In fact, in none of the prior dealings between the parties did Maurice Lenell ever receive the printing plates and dies. Although the final shipment of the Family Favorite boxes was made in January, 1995, Maurice Lenell did not ask for the printing plates and dies until after suit was filed. Maurice Lenell was not justified in withholding payment for the final shipment of the Family Favorite boxes.

8. The acknowledgment form agreed to by the parties provides that Maurice Lenell is liable for a finance charge of llk% per month on all past due invoices and all expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, for collection of past due amounts. (Px 3, ¶ 15).

9. Maurice Lenell breached its agreement by failing to pay invoice No. 93577 on or before February 28, 1995 and is liable in the amount of $4,140.00, plus finance charges at the rate of 1.5% per month ($62.10) from March 1, 1995 to October 31, 1996 (20 x $62.10 = $1,242.00), plus costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

B. PINWHEEL CLAIM

10. As of the summer of 1993, pinwheel cookies were Maurice Lenell’s best selling cookie in the Chicago market. During that period, Maurice Lenell began discussions with certain key customers about the possibility of introducing a new size, a 20 oz. box, into the marketplace. At the same time, Maurice Lenell began developing a new design and interviewing box manufacturers about this new product. The financial negotiations were handled by Patrick Buckley, Malnove’s Midwest Regional Manager, and Terry Cohen, Maurice Lenell’s President. In the course of these negotiations, Terry Cohen expressed his confidence in the proposed new product by predicting that “they would be flying off the shelf’ and that “we want them as fast as you can produce them.” The Court finds extremely credible the testimony of Patrick Buckley explaining his dealings with Terry Cohen and Wayne Cohen.

11. From August 30, 1993 to October 28, 1993, Patrick Buckley sent Wayne Cohen and Terry Cohen three written price quotations for the pinwheel cookies. On October 29, 1993, Patrick Buckley met with Terry Cohen to finalize negotiations for the pinwheel cookie boxes. Terry Cohen ordered 500,000 boxes at a price of $122.31 per thousand. Terry Cohen selected the volume of boxes and understood that in reliance upon Maurice Le-nell’s order, Malnove would proceed to order all of the polyboard it would need to manufacture the boxes. Terry Cohen understood that the larger the run, the better the price he could receive from Malnove. Maurice Lenell received a price discount by ordering 500,000 boxes from Malnove.

12. On October 29, 1993, Maurice Lenell issued its purchase order No. 30659 for 500,-000 pinwheel boxes, “As Per Our Release.” (Px 6). On November 10, 1993, Malnove issued its acknowledgment No. 16880 for the pinwheel cookie boxes and therein stated that the “Price is based on inventory shipping 90 days from date of completion. At 90 days, inventory will be billed, and will be shipped 30 days after billing.” (Px 7). This acknowledgment was never executed by Maurice Lenell.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
944 F. Supp. 657, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20011, 1996 WL 635193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malnove-inc-of-nebraska-v-hearthside-baking-co-ilnd-1996.