Dist.Ct. erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff’s action alleging that defendant breached contract requiring plaintiff to supply certain goods by failing to timely pay for goods that had been delivered to defendant. Record showed that plaintiff halted delivery of goods after defendant owed approximately $185,000 to plaintiff, and Dist. Ct. found that plaintiff had breached contract first by failing to timely ship goods to defendant under circumstances where contract called for prompt shipment of goods, while contract failed to contain provision requiring prompt payment for said goods. Ct. of Appeals, though, found that defendant’s summary judgment motion should not have been granted, since there was material question as to whether defendant's delay in payment to plaintiff was reasonable. Ct. also noted that there was issue regarding when defendant informed plaintiff that it would not be retaining portion of its business that required plaintiff to supply certain goods.
