Question

Please read the case below and answer in the following format: 1) Relevant Law 2) Conclusion - the outcome, and why.

The book for this course is Business Law with UCC application - 14th edition

The case is the following one:

Lamas Company, Inc., was incorporated in Georgia. Baldwin negotiated with Lamas, sole owner of Lamas Company, Inc., to finish some electrical work on a construction site. When Baldwin was dissatisfied with the work, he decided to sue. Unfortunately, the statute of limitations ran out before he could sue Lamas Company, Inc., so he sued Lamas individually. Baldwin argued that he had dealt only with Lamas, that he did not know Lamas was an agent of the company, that Lamas did not tell him about the company, and that he understood the contract to be with Lamas individually. Lamas pointed out that Baldwin made out and sent checks directly to Lamas Company, Inc., and that Lamas Company, Inc., always appeared as the payee on those checks. Lamas claimed that this evidence alone would be enough to stop Baldwin from denying that he had dealt with Lamas Company, Inc. The trial court rendered judgment against Lamas. On appeal, did the appellate court reverse? Explain. Lamas v. Baldwin, 230 S.E.2d 13 (GA).

Answer 1

relevant law - contract act, uniform commercial code

In given case plaintiff is Baldwin & defendant is Lama. As trial court render judgment against lama.

scope of limitation act dose not provide any kind of shields to victim to develop fraudulent activity. Its responsibility of defendant to prove with evidence that due care was taken before entering in contract. As quasi contract dose not require any concent it exist due to situation arose. And as agent is representative and not owner but during course as lama was sole owner of lama Inc. Lama personably hold the contractual obligation & responsible also. If lama can withdraw amount from lama Inc. then lama is capable to handle contractual obligation. On failure to commit obligation then with soberly he must return the received amount from Baldwin. Also in case Baldwin face any secondary loss which occur due to failure as per commitment of contract then he must ask damages occur due to non completion of assign task within contractual period.

conclusion - Appellate court will continue the rendered judgment against lama by lower court.