Plaintiff appealed from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County (California) denying it all relief, in an action that arose from a dispute that involved plaintiff’s picking, packing, and marketing of defendant’s 1985 table grape crop under a written contract between the parties.
California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. counsels on reporting time pay California
Plaintiff’s case arose from a dispute that involved its picking, packing, and marketing of defendant’s table grape crop under a written contract. Plaintiff alleged breach of contract, a common count, a claim on an account stated, and sought recovery of $ 169,337 consisting of a crop advance of $ 150,000, and an additional $ 19,337 in fees and charges incurred on behalf of defendant but not recovered through the sale of the grapes. The court agreed with plaintiff that the trial court erroneously interpreted the contract as not requiring repayment of the $ 150,000 advance because of insufficient crop proceeds. There was no provision in the contract to support a conclusion that plaintiff assumed the risk that the market would not produce a return for defendant or otherwise limited its right to repayment on the loan. Therefore, defendant remained liable for repayment, less any offset.
The judgment was reversed because the court erroneously interpreted plaintiff’s written contract as not requiring the repayment of a $ 150,000 advance because of insufficient crop proceeds. Defendant remained liable for repayment, less any offset.