Question

Pizza of Gaithersburg and The Pizza Shops (Pizza Shops) contracted with Virginia Coffee Service (Virginia) to install vending machines in each of their restaurants. One year later, the Macke Company (a provider of vending machines) purchased Virginia’s assets, and the vending machine contracts were assigned to Macke. Pizza Shops had dealt with Macke before but had chosen Virginia because they preferred the way it conducted its business. When Pizza Shops attempted to terminate their contracts for vending services, Macke brought suit for damages for breach of contract.

What arguments would support Pizza Shop’s termination of the contracts?

What arguments would support Macke’s suit for breach of contract?

Which side should prevail? Explain.

Answer 1

Macke should prevail. A contractual duty might be assigned, and the promisee cannot cancel the contract if the nature of the exhibition remains the equivalent substantially. Here, the first contract was for the establishment, support, and stocking of a candy machine. It included either a permit allowed to Virginia by the Pizza Shops or rent of a part of their premises. It did not include a contract for individual administrations. Since the nature of execution remained the equivalent considerably under Macke, Virginia's appointment of its delegations was admissible and enforceable. Legally binding delegations, except if generally expressed, are delegable if the nature of execution remains the equivalent substantially.