Opinion ID: 3016904
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Failure to Source Component Parts for the 1065

Text: Valves Specialty did not establish that its subcontractor even was capable of manufacturing the 1065 valves. Its contract with Superior states, and Specialty does not dispute, that it was required to supply “fully manufactured, assembled, and tested” 1065 valves. The record also shows that Specialty’s South Korean subcontractor never found a supplier for six of the roughly thirty component parts. Specialty alleges that Superior agreed to supply these components in the fall of 1998. But the only evidence of this is a single statement made by Brisbin.11 Neither a written contract nor other documentary evidence exists. Even 11 Brisbin testified on direct examination: “I believe there was a couple [of components] . . . that [the South Korean manufacturer was] not able to source at that time without a great deal of costs and time. So Superior offered to supply approximately five or six of the internal components.” 26 assuming Brisbin’s testimony is credited, such an agreement would be unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. See 13 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2201 (requiring an agreement for the sale of goods over $500 to be in writing). Thus we do not know when, or even if, Specialty could have begun manufacturing the 1065 valves. Again, this is an issue the Magistrate Judge is best qualified to resolve on remand.