James Baird Co. v. Gimbel Bros., Inc.

eJames Baird Co. v. Gimbel Bros., Inc.
United States Court of Appeals
64 F.2d 344 (2d Cir. 1933)

Facts: Gimbel Bros. (the defendant) heard that there was a contract being bid on in Pennsylvania to build a public building; defendant calculated the amount of linoleum required for the building and sent an offer to the bidders on the contract, saying that whomever won the contract with PA could buy their linoleum at one of two price points (varying by quality). Unfortunately, the defendants had underestimated the amount by half. The plaintiff got the offer, and then sent a bid to the PA group based on the amounts stated, and then received the telegram from defendants saying that they were revoking their offer due to the miscalculation and would send one out later for about double the price. (The plaintiff received the offer and such on the 28th of December). On Dec. 30th PA accepted the plaintiff's bid. On the 31st, the plaintiff received the letter of withdrawl (of the offer?) from the defendant. The plaintiff formally accepted the original offer of the defendant, and when the defendant insisted there was no contract, sued for damages.

Procedure: Trial judge found for the defense; plaintiff appealed.

Issue: Was there a contract?

Holding: No.

Reasoning: Using the offer in the course of bidding does not count as relying on it in a meaniful legal way, especially since in the language of the offer you could only accept after you had won the contract from PA.