Happy Dack Trading Co., Ltd. v. Agro-Industries, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that the parol evidence rule does not bar consideration of extrinsic evidence “offered to show that a writing which purports to be a contract is not a contract at all, but merely a sham”
• intermediate buyer could recover travel and testing expenses incurred after ultimate buyer rejected the goods

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).