Dixon Dairy Farms Inc. v. Conagra Feed Co.

Trial court properly disregarded plaintiff's affidavit claiming that the cattle feed purchased from defendant was worthless since that evidence contradicted plaintiff's prior admission that the feed had value.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Pursuant to an open account agreement, Conagra Feed Company sold cow feed to Dixon Dairy Farms, Inc. for a period of about two months. When Conagra sued for the outstanding invoice balance of $123,110.61,1 Dixon Dairy claimed an offset on the ground that Conagra’s feed was not fit for the ordinary purposes for which such feed is used, and counterclaimed for breach of warranty and lost profits. The trial court granted Conagra summary judgment on both its suit on account and on Dixon Dairy’s counterclaim. Due to lack of competent evidence, we affirmed the grant of summary judgment to Conagra on Dixon Dairy’s claim for lost profits.2 But we reversed the summary judgment to Conagra on the account claim, reasoning that some evidence supported the offset defense that the feed was not fit for its ordinary intended purpose and thus was not merchantable under OCGA § 11-2-314 2 c.3

On remand, Conagra submitted opinion evidence4 that the value of the feed delivered equaled the purchase price invoiced to Dixon Dairy. Conagra again moved for summary judgment on all claims, arguing that the undisputed evidence demonstrated that Dixon Dairy could show no offset or warranty damages as defined in OCGA § 11-2-714 2. Dixon Dairy responded with an affidavit from its general manager that, based on the performance of the dairy herd during the period it consumed Conagra feed, it was his opinion “that the feed had no value.” Disregarding the affidavit as conclusory and as completely inconsistent with the undisputed fact that the herd had subsisted and produced milk while consuming the feed, the trial court granted Conagra summary judgment on all claims. Dixon Dairy appeals. We affirm, holding that Dixon Dairy was estopped from claiming the feed had no value and thus did not produce any competent evidence to contradict Conagra’s testimony of no warranty damages or offset.

Dixon Dairy Farms Inc. v. Conagra Feed Co.

Trial court properly disregarded plaintiff's affidavit claiming that the cattle feed purchased from defendant was worthless since that evidence contradicted plaintiff's prior admission that the feed had value.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report