John D. Copanos & Sons, Inc. v. McDade Rigging and Steel Erection Co., Inc.
Decision Date | 13 July 1979 |
Docket Number | No. 1390,1390 |
Citation | 43 Md.App. 204,403 A.2d 402 |
Parties | JOHN D. COPANOS & SONS, INC. v. McDADE RIGGING AND STEEL ERECTION COMPANY, INC., et al. |
Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Jerald J. Oppel and Pamela J. White, Baltimore, with whom were Ober, Grimes & Shriver, Baltimore, on the brief, for appellant.
Emanuel H. Horn and John E. Mudd, Baltimore, with whom were Gary C. Duvall and Miles & Stockbridge, Baltimore, on the brief, for appellees.
Argued before THOMPSON, LISS and COUCH, JJ.
This appeal requires us to decide when a business concern may recover lost profits in an action based on negligence, breach of contract, breach of warranty, and strict liability. On the one hand, John D. Copanos & Sons, Inc., the business concern and appellant, urges that any lost profits which can be shown with reasonable certainty may be recovered. On the other hand, McDade Rigging and Steel Erection Company, Inc., and Rental Tools and Equipment Company, Inc., appellees, contend that lost profits allegedly suffered by a "new" business may not be recovered. It is their position that appellant's venture in this case was new, hence it may not recover any such lost profits. The trial court agreed with appellees and from that ruling this appeal flows.
Appellant has been a manufacturer of pharmaceuticals since 1963, and has apparently enjoyed steadily increasing profits on the manufacture and sale of pharmaceuticals in liquid, tablet, and powder form. Included among the pharmaceuticals appellant produces are various types of penicillin. In 1972 appellant purchased a Zanasi capsule machine to be used in the production of capsuled pharmaceuticals, specifically ampicillin, a form of penicillin. Having decided to move certain of the equipment within its plant, appellant contracted with appellee McDade to move the equipment, which included moving the Zanasi machine from the first floor to the second floor. While on the first floor, the machine had been operated, tested, finely tuned, and made ready to begin commercial production of ampicillin capsules immediately upon its placement on the second floor. On October 2, 1973, McDade prepared the capsule machine for removal to the second floor by positioning it on a forklift rented to McDade by appellee Rental. The machine was raised to a height of five to eight feet; the forklift then pitched forward against a wall of the plant destroying the capsule machine and causing other damage, not pertinent here. Search for a replacement machine was instituted but because of its foreign manufacture and the limited number of Zanasi machines in existence, it was not until December 31, 1973 that another machine could be purchased, installed, tested, and made fully operational. Appellant proffered that during this period certain customers cancelled their firm orders and did not fulfill their intentions to order large quantities of ampicillin capsules. Suit was filed in the Superior Court of Baltimore City where, prior to trial, appellee Rental moved the court to restrict appellant's evidence of consequential damages by eliminating evidence of lost profits from the case. After a hearing, during which appellant made a proffer as to the evidence it was prepared to offer with regard to lost profits, the trial court granted appellee Rental's motion. Following the receipt of evidence, a jury awarded appellant the amount of $50,019.49 against both appellees. This amount, of course, does not encompass any "lost profits" award.
Appellant contends that lost profits which can be shown with reasonable certainty, and are not speculative or conjectural, should be recoverable if they were foreseeable. Appellees urge that lost profits from a new business or venture simply are not recoverable under Maryland law and that, in any event, lost profits in this case were not foreseeable and are thus not recoverable.
It seems well settled in this State that there may be a recovery for unrealized profits providing (1) plaintiff shows that a breach by a defendant was the cause of the loss; (2) it is shown that defendant could have reasonably foreseen that a loss of profits would be a probable result of a breach; and (3) the lost profits are proved with reasonable certainty. See Impala Platinum v. Impala Sales, 283 Md. 296, 339, 389 A.2d 887 (1978), and M & R Builders v. Michael, 215 Md. 340, 345-46, 138 A.2d 350 (1958). There appears to be a caveat to this rule in the case of new business, however, which appellees and the trial court felt was dispositive. This caveat was examined in detail by the Court of Appeals in Evergreen Amusement Corp. v. Milstead, 206 Md. 610, 112 A.2d 901 (1955), where it was said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Reuter v. Reuter
...speculative, and that such speculation cannot serve as the basis for a court's judgment (citing John D. Copanos & Sons v. McDade Rigging and Steel Erection, 43 Md.App. 204, 403 A.2d 402 (1979)). Copanos & Sons is not apposite here, as the ruling there involves a claim for lost profits as da......
-
CR–RSC Tower I, LLC v. RSC Tower I, LLC
...breach. See Impala Platinum, Ltd. v. Impala Sales, Inc., 283 Md. 296, 389 A.2d 887 (1978); John D. Copanos & Sons, Inc. v. McDade Rigging & Steel Erection Co., 43 Md.App. 204, 403 A.2d 402 (1979); Sergeant Co. v. Clifton Building Corp., 47 Md.App. 307, 423 A.2d 257 (1981). See also Hoang v.......
-
Hoang v. Hewitt Avenue
...recover damages for lost profits resulting from the supplier's breach of contract. In John D. Copanos & Sons, Inc. v. McDade Rigging and Steel Erection Company, Inc., 43 Md.App. 204, 403 A.2d 402 (1979), the plaintiff, a pharmaceutical company, contracted with the defendant to move a newly-......
-
National Micrographics Systems, Inc. v. OCE-Industries, Inc., OCE-INDUSTRIE
...v. Butler Aviation International, Inc., 44 Md.App. 610, 632, 411 A.2d 1055 (1980); John D. Copanos & Sons, Inc. v. McDade Rigging & Steel Erection Co., Inc., 43 Md.App. 204, 206, 403 A.2d 402 (1979). NMS argues that the 66 page summary showing OCE's actual sales in the NMS territory was the......