From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Strong v. Commercial Carpet Co.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Mar 27, 1975
163 Ind. App. 145 (Ind. Ct. App. 1975)

Summary

listing "performance by the complaining party" as an essential element of a contractual action

Summary of this case from F. McConnell and Sons, Inc. v. Target Data Systems, (N.D.Ind. 1999)

Opinion


324 N.E.2d 834 (Ind.App. 1 Dist. 1975) 163 Ind.App. 145 Grace STRONG and Lewis Strong, husband and wife, Appellants (Plaintiffs Below), v. COMMERCIAL CARPET CO., INC. and Kenneth Bullington, Appellees (Defendants Below). No. 1-973A170. Court of Appeals of Indiana, First District. March 27, 1975

       Gerald G. Fuchs, Evansville, for appellants.

       Robert H. Hahn, George A. Porch, Evansville, for appellee; Bamberger, Foreman, Oswalds&sHahn, Evansville, of counsel.

       ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

       LYBROOK, Judge.

       In order to clarify the ruling of this court in our original opinion in this cause, we deem it necessary to issue a written opinion on defendants-appellees' petition for rehearing.

       Our opinion, reported at Ind.App., 322 N.E.2d 387, declared that pursuant to prior case law and existing rules of pleading and procedure, it was entirely proper for appellants to seek relief on alternative theories of breach of contract and negligence. We also held that since appellants had presented evidence on each element of their contractual claim it was reversible error for the trial court to sustain petitioner's motion for judgment on the evidence as to the contract theory. Accordingly, we reversed the judgment of the trial court and ordered a new trial. In doing so, however, it was not the intention of this court to order a new trial upon the theory of negligence. Inasmuch as the record supported the jury verdict for petitioners on the count of negligence, judgment thereon in favor of petitioners should have been and is hereby affirmed.

       Cause remanded for trial upon the breach of contract theory only. In all other respects, petitioners' request for rehearing is denied.

       ROBERTSON, C.J., and LOWDERMILK, J., concur.


Summaries of

Strong v. Commercial Carpet Co.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Mar 27, 1975
163 Ind. App. 145 (Ind. Ct. App. 1975)

listing "performance by the complaining party" as an essential element of a contractual action

Summary of this case from F. McConnell and Sons, Inc. v. Target Data Systems, (N.D.Ind. 1999)

In Strong v. Commercial Carpet Co., Inc., 163 Ind. App. 145, 322 N.E.2d 387 (1975), a carpet company had agreed to install a carpet in the plaintiff's home, but was delayed in completing the work because there was not enough carpeting.

Summary of this case from Desco Corp. v. Harry W. Trushel Const

In Strong v. Commercial Carpet Co., Inc., 163 Ind. App. 145, 322 N.E.2d 387, 324 N.E.2d 834 (Ct.App:1975), defendant contracted to install carpeting in plaintiffs' home.

Summary of this case from Coyle v. Englander's
Case details for

Strong v. Commercial Carpet Co.

Case Details

Full title:GRACE STRONG AND LEWIS STRONG, HUSBAND AND WIFE v. COMMERCIAL CARPET CO.…

Court:Court of Appeals of Indiana

Date published: Mar 27, 1975

Citations

163 Ind. App. 145 (Ind. Ct. App. 1975)
163 Ind. App. 145
322 N.E.2d 387

Citing Cases

Coyle v. Englander's

A somewhat analogous Indiana case holds that personal injury damages may be recovered in a contract action.…

Captain Co., Inc. v. Stenberg

The Company admits the question of whether a contract has been breached is ordinarily a question of fact, and…