Mandatory Memo
To: Alexis Fairchild
From: Marshall Peterson
Date: February 8, 2015
Subject: Mandatory Mediation
Mrs. Fairchild,
I am writing you this memo in compliance with the mandatory mediation requirements issued by the court. I would first like to state to you my stance in this case. I have been dealing with this particular vendor for about six months now. The business relationship started after my wife and I visited Mrs. Doe’s Sunday school class in Huntsville, Alabama. I was there in support of my wife and to explore the Christian religion, but in small talk Mrs. Doe informed me of her family’s grape vineyard and the value of a certain natural product they produced. My natural herb store was in need of some new products for my customers so I agreed to try Mrs. Doe’s product in my store.
The muscatine products were a success so naturally I continued to place orders for the products by phone and paid the invoices as the money became available; at this point in the business relationship there was no written contracts signed between Mrs. Doe’s business and mine thus my understanding is that our contract was of the implied variety, meaning that the action of my ordering and her supplying was the contract. After a few months I began hearing chatter about the popularity of muscadine grape products, and as a vendor I needed to get some legal documents locking down my business relationship Mrs. Doe’s vineyards before the price of the supply went too high. When I first started my company 2011, I remember reading a book about the laws of supply and demand. I remember reading that as the rise in demand grew the cost of the supply would grow as well. To refresh my memory I went back over that book and there it was in black and white “to make money within this cycle, get in early and get out early. That is, increase your supply as the demand starts to rise and cut your price as the demand starts to fall” (Ball K., Seidman. D 2011). Clearly our implied relationship was
From: Marshall Peterson
Date: February 8, 2015
Subject: Mandatory Mediation
Mrs. Fairchild,
I am writing you this memo in compliance with the mandatory mediation requirements issued by the court. I would first like to state to you my stance in this case. I have been dealing with this particular vendor for about six months now. The business relationship started after my wife and I visited Mrs. Doe’s Sunday school class in Huntsville, Alabama. I was there in support of my wife and to explore the Christian religion, but in small talk Mrs. Doe informed me of her family’s grape vineyard and the value of a certain natural product they produced. My natural herb store was in need of some new products for my customers so I agreed to try Mrs. Doe’s product in my store.
The muscatine products were a success so naturally I continued to place orders for the products by phone and paid the invoices as the money became available; at this point in the business relationship there was no written contracts signed between Mrs. Doe’s business and mine thus my understanding is that our contract was of the implied variety, meaning that the action of my ordering and her supplying was the contract. After a few months I began hearing chatter about the popularity of muscadine grape products, and as a vendor I needed to get some legal documents locking down my business relationship Mrs. Doe’s vineyards before the price of the supply went too high. When I first started my company 2011, I remember reading a book about the laws of supply and demand. I remember reading that as the rise in demand grew the cost of the supply would grow as well. To refresh my memory I went back over that book and there it was in black and white “to make money within this cycle, get in early and get out early. That is, increase your supply as the demand starts to rise and cut your price as the demand starts to fall” (Ball K., Seidman. D 2011). Clearly our implied relationship was