 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Protek11/7/2005
{ } "A: Payroll records.
{ } "Q: Where are they, sir? Can you point them out, please, in the Plaintiff's exhibit notebook?
{ } "A: I think there is an example of operators in Plaintiff's Exhibit 14. { } "Q: You will have to bear with me while in find 14, sir. So there are six employees listed and week ending 4-18 is listed at the top left. Is that the correct page, sir?
{ } "A: Yes.
{ } "Q: And you are aware that Lake Erie's bolts, first bolts arrived April 16; right?
{ } "A: Yes, yeah.
{ } "Q: Okay. Now, how would I know from this document, sir, that these folks were standing around doing nothing and getting paid by Protek?
{ } "A: I didn't allude that this document pointed to anybody standing around doing nothing.
{ } "Q: I will withdraw the characterization. Sir, how does this document support your claim for lost profits?
{ } "A: This I believe was intended to show, dealing with the first order when we found the problems with the bolts, we freed three people on the job ; and this is basically pulling job cards for work that we did on those particular dates over and above what we normally would have done, and this is basically what that is intended to show.
{ } " *
{ } "A: I never said they were idle. I said it has happened. In this case this is when we were running bolts that we were having problems with that we threw extra body on to ensure that we did not have any product leaving our plant.
{ } Tr. at 366-381.
{ } Upon review, the trial court's decision not to award Protek's damages claimed for lost profits and labor costs is not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Protek's evidence to support its claim for these damages was confusing and speculative.
{ } Protek's first assignment of error is overruled.
II.
{ } In the second assignment of error, Protek argues the trial court erred in concluding LES did not warrant 100% defect free parts. Protek cites the QS/ISO 9000 certifications held by LES, promoted by its sales representative and printed on all quotes submitted to Protek. The certifications indicate the company has developed and implemented programs designed to promote defect-free parts production and a corrective action system to prevent future deficiencies. Protek asserts the certifications constitute a warranty peculiar to the various industries, including a warranty for 100% on time delivery and 100% defect free shipment of parts. Protek maintains the warranties were found in LES' QS Manuals and evidenced by the responses to the quality problems, including the corrective action plan.
{ } Protek cites the 100% containment plan implemented by LES, including a certification of "100% sort" on each shipment. Protek asserts the last shipment from LES contained bolts with missing threads, split heads, missing plating and non-conforming shoulders, which shipment was labeled 100% sort. Accordingly, Protek maintains the trial court erred in not finding Protek sustained $244,908 in incidental damages incurred in connection with the defective product.
{ } The trial court found 1,098 of the 2.1 million LES bolts delivered to Protek were defective. The trial court concluded a .05% defect rate was acceptable under prevailing fastener industry safety standards.
{ } An employee of LES, Stanley Rhodes, testified at trial as to the 100% containment policy:
{ } "Q: Well what does QS specify, Mr. Rhodes?
{ } "A: QS is not a certification of product. It is a certification of your processes.
{ } "Q: Doesn
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|