Lexis Nexis - Case Brief

Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.

Law School Case Brief

Stampede Presentation Prods. v. Productive Transp., Inc. - No. 12-CV-491A(Sr), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72236 (W.D.N.Y. Apr. 30, 2013)


To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.


Plaintiff Stampede Presentation Products, Inc. (Stampede), brought this action in New York State Supreme Court, Erie County, against defendants Productive Transportation, Inc., Productive Transportation Carrier Corp. (collectively, Productive), and 1SaleADay L.L.C., seeking money damages based on an alleged loss of an interstate shipment of 960 flat screen TVs. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss arguing that Stampede failed to state a claim against it for breach of contract because, under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), the Purchase Invoice governing the sale of the TVs was a "shipment" contract, not a "destination" contract, and the risk of loss passed from the seller to the buyer upon delivery of the goods to the carrier.


Did Stampede fail to state a claim against defendant for breach of contract, thereby warranting the grant of defendant’s motion to dismiss?




The Court held that the contract between the parties clearly expressed the parties’ understanding that Stampede designated a carrier to make the shipment of the TVs from the manufacturer’s warehouse to the customer. There was no express language anywhere in the contract documents specifying that the defendant was itself required to deliver the TVs to a particular destination. Accordingly, since defendant had already fulfilled its contractual obligations, and Stampede had assumed the risk, at the time the goods were lost, there can be no set of facts pleaded that would allow the Court to draw the reasonable inference that defendant was liable for breach. Therefore, the Court concluded that Stampede has failed to plead sufficient factual content to state a breach of claim against defendant, and granted the latter’s motion to dismiss.

Access the full text case Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
Be Sure You're Prepared for Class