Legal analysis of Precise Engineering Corporation software contract with Quik Mart Stores

Negligence

FACTS:

Precise Engineering Corporation had a contract with Quik Mart Stores to provide customized software for Quik Mart Stores' inventory control system.

A Precise Engineering Corporation subcontractor is induced by a Quik Mart competitor, Retail Outlets, Inc.

The delivery of the inventory control system software is delayed one week.

Quik Mart Stores does sustain a $500,000 loss in profits.

The issue question at hand is: Can Quik Mart Stores sue Precise Engineering Corporation for negligence and Retail Outlets, Inc. For interfering with the delivery of the inventory control system, causing it to be one week late, that caused them to lose $500,000 in profits and can Precise Engineering Corporation sue Retail Outlets, Inc. For wrongful or tortious interference with the contract by inducing the subcontractor?

RULE OF LAW:

Negligence occurs when the defendant owes a duty to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty has occurred, the breach of the duty caused harm to occur, and the plaintiff has suffered from harm (Forseeability of Harm) and wrongful or tortious interference with contracts occurs when a person causes a party to commit breach of contract or disrupts the person's ability to perform the contract obligations (Wrongful or Tortious Interferrence with Contracts).

ANALYSIS:

Precise Engineering Corporation did owe a duty to Quik Mart Stores because a contract had been signed by both parties. A breach of duty had occurred when the inventory system software was delayed one week in delivery. Causation has occurred because the harm is foreseeable because the purpose of the inventory software is to control inventory to sustain profits (Tort Rules of Law). Retail Outlets Inc. did know about the contract obligations in order to interfere. Retail Outlets, Inc. did have intentions to induce or otherwise would have no reason to interfere in the contract obligations. Retail Outlets, Inc. did interfere with the contract obligations without authorization from Precise Engineering Corporation to do so. Damages occurred because Quik Mart Stores did have damages of a $500,000 loss in profits, not including the loss of the inventory that would have made the profits.

CONCLUSION: