Commercial appeal arising from a manufacturing contract dispute over delayed and deficient mold production for an automotive supply program.
The appellant argued that the respondent's transfer of one mold to another subcontractor constituted accord and satisfaction and challenged the reasonableness of the respondent's mitigation costs.
The court rejected those arguments, holding that there was no agreement discharging the appellant's original obligations and that subcontracting completion was a necessary mitigation step in light of the delivery pressures imposed by the end customer.
The appeal was allowed only in part to correct the accounting by crediting the appellant with the unpaid final one-third contract amount for the transferred mold.
The respondent remained substantially successful and was awarded three-quarters of its appeal costs.
