International Ore & Fertilizer Corp. v. SGS Control Services, Inc.

Citation. 38 F.3d 1279 (2d Cir. 1994)

Powered by

Law Students: Don’t know your Bloomberg Law login? Register here

Citation38 F.3d 1279 (2d Cir. 1994)

Brief Fact Summary.

Plaintiff’s cargo was contaminated aboard Defendant’s ship. Plaintiff sued Defendant for breach of contract and negligent misrepresentation. On appeal, the court held that the breach of contract claim (which was rejected) should have been upheld. Plaintiff had not filed a cross-appeal on the breach of contract claim.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

An appellee who has not cross-appealed can urge alternative grounds for affirming a judgment but cannot seek to enlarge his or her rights under the judgment by enlarging damages or the scope of equitable relief.

Points of Law - Legal Principles in this Case for Law Students.

A motion for reconsideration should be granted where there is: (1) an intervening change in controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence; or (3) the need to correct a clear error of law or fact or to prevent manifest injustice.

View Full Point of Law

Plaintiff contracted with Defendant to transport fertilizer. The cargo was contaminated aboard Defendant’s ship and Plaintiff’s purchaser refused delivery. Plaintiff sued Defendant for breach of contract and negligent misrepresentation. Plaintiff was awarded damages on the negligent misrepresentation claim. On appeal, the court held that the negligent misrepresentation claim should have been dismissed, and the breach of contract claim (which was rejected) should have been upheld.

Issue.

Was the appellate court able to enlarge Plaintiff’s rights under the judgment by enlarging the amount of damages on the breach of contract claim?

Held.

No. The appellate court was not able to enlarge Plaintiff’s rights under the judgment by enlarging the amount of damages on the breach of contract claim.

Discussion.

Given the rule that an appellee can seek to sustain a judgment on any grounds supported by the record, the appellate court could uphold a finding of liability on the breach of contract theory. The court could not enlarge the judgment to award full contract damages to the Plaintiff, however, because an appellee who has not filed a cross-appeal cannot enlarge the amount of damages or scope of equitable relief.