In cases where a nonconformity in goods involves a delay in the delivery of specially manufactured goods, the law in Connecticut requires substantial nonconformity for a buyer's rejection under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42a-2-601, and precludes a dismissal for failure to state a claim on the grounds that the perfect tender rule, codified at § 2-601, demands complete performance. Rather, Connecticut law requires a determination at trial as to whether a delay under the facts constitutes a substantial nonconformity.
Plaintiff, a California technology corporation, sued defendant buyer, a Connecticut corporation, alleging a breach of contract for the purchase and sale of a computer system. Plaintiff alleged that defendant breached the contract by refusing to accept delivery of the goods covered by the contract. Defendant argued that it was plaintiff who breached the contract by failing to make a timely delivery. Defendant brought a motion to dismiss, which the court denied.
Did plaintiff's 16-day delay in delivering the goods constitute a substantial nonconformity in delivery?
The court found that in Connecticut, in cases where a nonconformity in the delivery of goods involved a delay in the delivery of specially manufactured goods, in order for a buyer to reject, there had to be a substantial nonconformity under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42a-2-601. Thus, whether or not the 16-day delay constituted a substantial nonconformity was a determination to be made at trial.