The Conflict Of A Cut Above And Angel Case Study - 6

The Conflict Of A Cut Above And holy man - Case Study ExampleThis is the story of the cases progress in the courts, from the time the plaintiff filed its complaint in court, to the appeal to the court that made the final decision in the case. The procedural history of this case is the following. On July 8, 2008, Angel and Cut Above entered into a receive for the sale and purchase of a specialized stretch forth. Pursuant to the contract Cut Above is to pay Angel $100,000.00 for the even out of a crane with special hydraulics that will assist Cut Above in constructing its clients addition over the water, as the infirmary is located on a Pensacola inlet, and the rehabilitation center is to be housed in the new addition. Cut Above paid Angel a deposit of $50,000.00 with the goal to be paid to Angel upon delivery of the crane, per specifications, on January 15, 2010. January 15, 2010, came and went and the crane did not arrive. The failure of the crane to arrive set the project back initially by one week. Following a conversation with Angels executive Cut Aboves understanding from the executive was that the crane would not be completed until January 31, 2010, at which time it was to be shipped via truck FOB the construction site. There is a provision in Cut Aboves contract with its client, Pensacola Memorial Hospital, that the project was to be completed by March 30, 2010, and that every day the project was delayed past that time, Cut Above would be assessed $500.00 per day, tell assessment is deducted from the hospitals final payment. Cut Above was charged $3,500.00 for a 7-day delay. Based on the foregoing Cut Above rented a crane to complete as much of the project as possible until the specialized crane arrived from Angel. The crane arrived on February 4, 2010, and Cut Above accepted delivery of the crane but withheld from its final payment to Angel its cost of renting another crane, as well as anticipated delay costs on the project.