Mississippi Chemical Corp. (MCC) produces ammonia at its fertilizer plant in Yazoo City, Mississippi. The production of ammonia involves the compression of gas in special equipment called a compressor train. In 1989, MCC bought from Dresser-Rand Co. a specially designed train that included a “high-case compressor” and a “low-case compressor.” The contract expressly guaranteed that the train would be free from defects and would conform to certain technical specifications, but it did not work as promised. When the highcase compressor broke in 1990, MCC wrote to Dresser, “This letter constitutes notice by MCC that [Dresser] is in breach” of the contract. The same defects caused the low-case compressor to break in 1993 and 1996.In 1997, MCC filed a suit in a federal district court against Dresser, asserting a number of claims based on the contract. Dresser argued, in part, that it had never received written notice of the defects in the low-case compressor and thus was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Was there sufficient notice to Dresser for MCC to recover for damages caused by defects in the train? Discuss.