Paulaner is an importer of German beer, and Domanik Sales Company was one of Paulaner's distributors.
The distributorship agreement provided that Paulaner could terminate the agreement if a default in payment by Domanik remained uncured five days after Domanik received a demand for payment. The contract also gave Paulaner the right to establish the terms of payment. Because of a previous default, Paulaner had placed Domanik on "COD status" and refused to afford it further credit. On March 10, 1998, Paulaner delivered a shipment of beer to Domanik. On March 18, 1998, Paulaner notified Domanik that the payment for the March 10 shipment was past due, that the amount due was $23,842.54, that payment was to be received no later than March 25, 1998, and that the agreement would be terminated if payment was not received by that date. The invoice for the March 10 delivery was sent by fax to Domanik on March 18, arriving after receipt of the default notice. Domanik wrote a check for the full amount due on Friday, March 20, 1998, and placed the payment in the mail. The envelope was postmarked Monday, March 23, 1998. Payment was not received by Paulaner in its Colorado offices until March 26, 1998. The distributorship agreement was terminated by Paulaner that same day, since payment had not been received as required by the default notice. Domanik contends that placing the payment in the mail constituted payment under the mailbox rule. Is it correct?

  • CreatedJuly 16, 2014
  • Files Included
Post your question