Ivan Tepper, the CEO of Delta Star, met with the sales manager at Michael’s, a flooring company. In a verbal agreement, he hired Michael’s to install carpet in the entryway of his office suite, and tile in his personal office and the office of Nash, his assistant.

Michael’s faxed Delta Star a purchase order which read, “Carpet for entrance to lobby, $832.22”. Michael’s installed the carpet and Delta Star paid the $832.22. But, Delta Star sought to cancel part of the remaining work installing tile, and Michael’s sued. 

At trial, Delta Star argued that, because the tiling was priced at more than $500, the UCC statute of frauds made the agreement unenforceable. The trial court disagreed, holding that the tile was specially manufactured, because Michael’s had never ordered that type of tile for a customer before. The lower court also determined that Delta Star had admitted the existence of the contract in its testimony, and that the purchase order amounted to a writing in any event. Michael’s was awarded $2,565 in damages, and Delta Star appealed.

Questions:

1. Was the contract enforceable?

2. Did the court find that the specialty goods exception applied in this case?

3. Did the court find that the judicial admission exception applied in this case?

4. Did the court find a sufficient memo for the merchant exception to apply?