Fleishman Sued for $5.2M Over Unpaid Pork Product Orders and Contract Breaches
Table of Contents
Case Background
Dawn International Ltd. supplied frozen pork to Jacob Fleishman Sales under a contract governed by Irish law. Fleishman placed several orders, which Dawn confirmed. Dawn delivered the products on schedule.
However, the business relationship broke down in late 2022. Dawn alleged Fleishman failed to pay for delivered shipments and refused to accept others. The dispute prompted legal action.
In November 2022, Dawn sent a formal payment demand. When Fleishman failed to respond, Dawn filed suit in federal court. The complaint included breach of contract and fraud claims.
Cause
Dawn alleged Fleishman failed to pay for multiple pork shipments. It also refused to accept pending orders.
According to the complaint, Fleishman never raised quality or condition objections. Dawn claimed the rejection lacked cause.
Therefore, Dawn ended the relationship and sought legal relief. The company also accused Fleishman of ordering products without intent to pay.
Injury
Dawn reported business disruptions due to unpaid and rejected shipments. It incurred additional storage costs for unsold goods.
The company also cited financial strain from the unpaid invoices. It claimed Fleishman’s actions breached the contract and undermined operations.
Dawn emphasized that it had followed all contractual terms. The company pursued compensation to recover losses and stabilize its business.
Damages
Dawn sought $5.2 million in total damages. This included $1.4 million for unpaid deliveries and $3.8 million for rejected goods.
It also requested pre-judgment interest, legal fees, and court costs. Additionally, Dawn asked for the return of goods still held by Fleishman. It filed a replevin claim for their recovery.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
· Plaintiff: Dawn International Ltd.
· Counsel for Plaintiff: Michele Leo Hintson | Andrew Joseph Oppenheim
· Defendant: Jacob Fleishman Sales, Inc
· Counsel for Defendant: Peter Mineo Jr. | Barry Ted Shevlin
Claims
Breach of Contract
Dawn International had entered a written agreement with Jacob Fleishman Sales for the supply of pork products. Dawn fulfilled its delivery obligations, but Fleishman allegedly failed to pay for several large shipments. The company also refused to accept remaining orders without raising timely objections. By failing to honor its payment obligations, Fleishman breached the contract.
Fraudulent Misrepresentation
Dawn alleged that Fleishman knowingly placed large orders without the intent to pay. According to the complaint, Fleishman used Dawn’s trust and past dealings to secure goods under false pretenses. Dawn argued that this conduct amounted to fraud, as Fleishman never intended to complete its financial obligations.
Unjust Enrichment
Dawn claimed Fleishman retained the benefit of delivered goods without compensating the supplier. The company argued that Fleishman’s failure to pay resulted in an unfair gain at Dawn’s expense. Therefore, Dawn sought restitution for the unpaid value of those goods.
Legal Costs
Dawn asked the court to order the return of goods still held by Fleishman. The supplier also sought recovery of legal fees, interest, and costs associated with enforcing its rights through litigation.
Defense
In their response to the plaintiff’s complaint, the defendant broadly denies the key allegations concerning jurisdiction, liability, and damages, and claims insufficient knowledge to admit or deny several others. They assert that the plaintiff has failed to present a legally sufficient case, challenging both the factual basis and the legal viability of the claims. The defendant maintains that the complaint does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted and urges the court to dismiss it accordingly.
Additionally, the defendant raises a range of affirmative defenses designed to bar or reduce liability. These include arguments that the plaintiff’s claims are time-barred under the statute of limitations, that the plaintiff contributed to or assumed the risk of any alleged harm, and that the plaintiff failed to mitigate damages. Other defenses assert procedural and equitable bars, such as waiver, estoppel, unclean hands, and possibly sovereign immunity or legal preemption. The defense concludes by requesting that the complaint be dismissed with prejudice and that the court award costs and attorneys’ fees in their favor.
Jury Verdict
The jury ruled in favor of Dawn International Ltd. across multiple breach of contract claims against Jacob Fleishman Sales, Inc., awarding:
· $1,872,265.04 for breach of delivered contracts (ribs)
· $969,456.06 for breach of outstanding contracts (ribs and pork bellies)
· $919,808.99 for unpaid pork ribs sold and delivered
Fleishman’s defenses, including revocation of acceptance and failure to mitigate damages, were rejected.
Although the jury found a breach of implied warranty of merchantability, they awarded $0 to Fleishman due to lack of damages. Dawn’s affirmative defenses of waiver and failure to mitigate were also not supported.
Court Documents:
Documents are available for purchase upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com