business law

Fred and Zuma Palermo contacted Colorado Carpet Installation, Inc., for a price quotation on providing and installing new carpeting and til­ing in their home. In response, Colorado Carpet submitted a written proposal to pro­vide and install the carpet at a certain price per square foot of material, including labor. The total was in excess of $500. The proposal was never accepted in writing by the Palermos, and the parties disagreed over how much of the proposal had been agreed to orally. After the installation of the carpet and tiling had begun, Mrs. Palermo became dissatisfied and sought the services of another contractor. Colorado Carpet then sued the Palermos for breach of the oral contract. The trial court held that the contract was one for services and was thus enforceable (that is, it did not fall under the Statute of Frauds [UCC 2–201], which requires contracts for the sale of goods for the price of $500 or more to be in writing to be enforceable). Discuss fully whether the contract between the Palermos and Colorado Carpet was primarily for the sale of goods or the sale of serv­ices.

Answers

The contract between the Palermos and Colorado Carpet was primarily for the sale of services and not for the sale of goods. The contract involved the installation and provision of carpeting, which is an example of a service. The sale of goods would involve the actual sale of the carpet itself. The installation of the carpet is the service being provided, which is separate from any sale of goods related to the carpet itself. Additionally, the Statute of Frauds requires that contracts for the sale of goods for the price of $500 or more be in writing to be enforceable, but this contract did not meet that requirement. This further indicates that the contract was primarily for the sale of services and not the sale of goods.

Answered by Cindy Richmond

We have mentors from

Contact support