Can you sue for lost business?

[StealingKat]

I was asked by a long time friend in the business a question about stallions. I had no answer so I thought I would post it here.

He or his business partners ( I am unclear on that fact) were one month behind in their stallions board. The stallion station refused to breed mares until the board was paid up in full. Board was paid up.
Are they able to sue for lost income? The mare owners were out board as they were not bred in the 15 day period. The fellows had to return the booking fees etc. He is feeling responsible for the mares board as well.

I honestly didnt have an answer for this one.

[Dave C]

I'm not a lawyer so take what I say with a grain of salt (or a block). In my opinion, the success of a lawsuit would depend on what is written in the contract and what was agreed to verbally between the various partners involved. If someone breeched their terms of contract then there are grounds to sue. If no terms of the expressed contract were breached, then you would have to establish that there was an implied contract and things are starting to get tricky.

Given the relatively small amounts in play (at most a couple thousand per mare) your friend is better off (if he/she) can afford it to eat the costs of the mare owners as a good will gesture, to try and make sure they are repeat customers or at least tell others that they were treated fairly. It's tough enough proving a stallion with out pissing people off (by suing) or making them feel like they were mistreated (the mare owners who sent their mares in good faith). JMHO

[madelyn]

This is really a question for the very wise hpkingjr... however I have a couple of questions. Was the policy about not breeding mares if the board was behind clearly stated up front in the contract? Does the stallion "hit" (ie: get his mares in foal on one cover) at a very high rate?

Since stud fees generally are not collected for a very long time, and much can happen in terms of mares resorbing or aborting, I think it might be hard to accurately quantify the economic loss. But also, I think, that if the refusal by the farm to breed the stallion due to the board owed was not in the contract, the farm MIGHT be able to be sued for Breach of Contract rather than Loss of Income.

[Intrinsic Worth]

I was asked by a long time friend in the business a question about stallions. I had no answer so I thought I would post it here.

He or his business partners ( I am unclear on that fact) were one month behind in their stallions board. The stallion station refused to breed mares until the board was paid up in full. Board was paid up.
Are they able to sue for lost income? The mare owners were out board as they were not bred in the 15 day period. The fellows had to return the booking fees etc. He is feeling responsible for the mares board as well.

I honestly didnt have an answer for this one.

Perhaps they should have paid their board.

[Hold Your Peace]

I think the OP is wondering if the mare owners could sue the stallion owners who seem to admit it was their fault that the stallion was unavailable to cover those mares.

As others have stated you'd have to go over the contracts to determinie liability.

A person can sue for anything, what the outcome will be depends on what the contracts say.

[KBEquine]

There's not enough information in the original question to even hazard a guess. A legal opinion is based on applying the appropriate law to the facts.

The post is a bit short on facts, as the poster got information 2nd hand & is just trying to help a friend.

For example, one important missing fact - the location of the stallion in question.

There IS no national law on contracts. In the US "contract law" is a creature of the state, so a clause can be interpreted one way in Utah & an entirely different way in Rhode Island. That's why you see the phrase "subject to the laws of Michigan [or Minnesota or whatever]" in lots of contracts - whoever wrote the contract wants to make sure it is interpreted the way they meant it to be interpreted.

Then again, the original posted is from Vancouver, BC, so all our US-based interpretations are especially unreliable, if applied to another nation's contracts, since there's no one international law that applies.

What we're really opining on is fairness.

And as Intrinsic Worth says, Perhaps they should have paid their board.

[Foggytrip]

Why would they be entitled to make money while they are keeping a stallion somewhere and not paying the bill? Why would they even consider any legal action, they are the ones who are in Fundamental breach for not paying board. Ridiculous

[StealingKat]

Ouch... Just asking a question guys. They also were not very far behind in the board which as I stated was paid up. I dont have enough information regarding the contracts involved. I think I will suggest that he pays the mares board and then move the stallion to a more reasonable facility. Seems to me when people pay over 1200.00 a month for stallion board (14,000 per year) the owners of the facility should have covered the mares. Again just my opinion. But I will suggest they move the stallion. They are in the states I just wont say where as a few of you on the board deal with them

PS The business lost was to the tune of $60,000.( this is the kind of loot I know nothing about...) As it was close to the end of the breeding season the mares owners chose another stallion.

[JimP]

[PS The business lost was to the tune of $60,000.( this is the kind of loot I know nothing about...) .[/quote]

If you stand to cover $60,000 dollar worth of mares what is the problem with being up to date with the board? I don't understand.

[dray33]

There are 3 parties here. This is all hypothetical, but:

1) the mare owners could sue, but would probably just move on once the stallion was deemed "out of commission".
2) the stallion owners could sue, due to the farm not fulfilling it's contract, although they would have a tough time of it.
3) the farm could sue, due to the owners not fulfilling it's contract, although they too would have a tough time.

Anyone can sue. The time and cost will make this one a non-starter, would be my guess. The contract would be the most important thing here (between the farm and stallion owners). And I could all but guarantee that the contract makes sure the farm gets paid before being legally binded to provide services. Unless they are trusting fools. So I would quess a suit to recover lost income would be thrown out, eventually (after loss of more money, by both parties).

[StealingKat]

I think you are all missing one very important piece of the puzzle THE BOARD HAD BEEN PAID IN FULL. It HAD been in arrears and there was no money owed to the farm.I have no idea why it was behind. Anyhow he is paying for the mares stays ( which I think is the right thing to do)

Here in Canada it is very rare to sue anyone for anything so it is way out of my league I am afraid.

They will be moving the stud and sueing the farm it looks like. The boys consulted with a lawyer of some type and the farm is in breech of contract. Messy business this horse breeding stuff.

[FOS]

hi StealingKat

I was asked by a long time friend in the business a question about stallions. I had no answer so I thought I would post it here.

He or his business partners ( I am unclear on that fact) were one month behind in their stallions board. The stallion station refused to breed mares until the board was paid up in full. Board was paid up.
Are they able to sue for lost income? The mare owners were out board as they were not bred in the 15 day period. The fellows had to return the booking fees etc. He is feeling responsible for the mares board as well.

I honestly didnt have an answer for this one.

...THE BOARD HAD BEEN PAID IN FULL. ...

Without knowing all the facts...I'll throw in my speculative two cents as follows.

If what I bolded above is proven to be fact, and there is no evidence (contractually or otherwise) that would otherwise support the farm's decision/action to refuse to breed the referenced stallion to mares that would otherwise have been bred to him (if he was available for service)...I sense that there is a strong possibility (likely leaning toward probability) that a court would more likely than not rule (re damages) in favor (at least to some extent) of the stallion owners. To what extent? Who knows, but beyond accounting and mathematics...testimony which the court considered credible (probably from what might be deemed experts) would likely benefit the stallion owners' efforts to prevail and possibly (if not probably) result in a financial award (re damages) being assigned them.

Without knowing and understanding ALL the information/specifics/evidence/statutes/laws etc etc etc related to the case, and the jurisdiction, it's likely the topic is little more than an exercise in speculation.

On the face of it though, sounds (to me anyway) like a rather drastic action was taken by the stallion station (your words) if in fact they (the stallion station) refused to breed the stallion to mares because the board bill was one month (your words) in arrears. I find it hard to believe that was the sole reason that the far/stallion station refused to breed the stallion.

Discussing possibilities...civil courts (as we know them) do NOT require that evidence of responsibility be 'beyond a reasonable doubt.' That's a threshold in criminal court.

That said...it's possible that one or more parties in a civil case (where thresholds are preponderance driven...not beyond a reasonable doubt driven) could be found liable and held responsible for damages (to varying degrees)...based on contributing factors.

Bottom line...I would NOT be surprised if there's more to this story than we've been told; and that one or more parties might be held accountable for their actions based on how the court deemed their actions contributed to matters/losses in question.

Oh well. Seems that it might be wise for your friend/s to consult with the appropriate civil attorney...familiar with the facts, and jurisdiction where the case (if it becomes one) would likely proceed.

Keep us apprised.

Respectfully

[StealingKat]

I'm fairly sure there is more to the story as well. Unfortunately I was only given one side of the story and can only go on the information I was given ( there are always two sides) But as a person who boards mares year round I always give my long term boarders a bit of room when it comes to payment. I know that things happen. I would never refuse service or stop feeding if they got behind. But thank you to all who have replied seems like they have completely ignored my advice anyhow. You have got to wonder why people ask for an opinion and then do the opposite. Opinions are free I guess LOL. I wont be surprised if this one hits the pages of Bloodhorse though....

[griff]

The outcome of a suit is not what the contract says but rather what the judge says

griff

[majxmom]

Well, gee whiz, they should just pay their bills and then they wouldn't have to worry about who got bred and when. I boarded horses for 20 years. People would just drive me crazy, going on vacation and then when they got back, saying they couldn't pay me just then. Driving up in a Mercedes and saying they forgot their checkbook for the third week in a row. Promising to pay before they left and then speeding down the driveway. Arggh! Their horse was taken care of. They owe the money. Just pay up!

When I was about 20 (a long time ago!), I visited a QH farm to see Western Doc, who was a pretty top stallion in Northern California then, for cutting and reining, I think. An older friend of mine who boarded horses had invited me out to dinner a couple of night before, saying that he had to go into town to mail his board bill off to the Western Doc people, where he was having a mare bred, and we might as well eat when we drove into town. I made a little fun of him, because I had just brought the bill up to him from the mail box about an hour earlier, and I thought he was being a bit obsessive about paying his bill so quickly. Dick said no, that he boarded horses for a living, and he knew how important it was to get your money. So we mailed the bill off and two days later, we decided to go out to see Western Doc in person.

We arrived at the farm unannounced, and the owner was very nice about it, but he asked if we would wait in the yard while he cleaned the stallion up. He didn't like people to see him unpolished. We agreed to wait. The man started to walk off, then he stopped and turned back. He said, "I want you to know how much I appreciate how you pay your bill." Dick poked me in the ribs and said,"See? People notice." I never forgot it. The VISA computer can wait for my money, but I always pay all of my horse bills the same day I get them: board, hay, vet. And I am always appreciated as a client. Recently I bought a horse from someone, and when I went to pick the horse up, the board bill had not been paid for two months and some days. I was surprised they released the horse to me, but I guess the farm figured it was better to get them out now.

Dick also taught me a simple trick for getting people to pay up. If someone was 30 days behind, we didn't argue. We just asked them to take the horse out. The first loss was the cheapest, and we couldn't let people get in too deep. So just take the horse out and pay me if you can later. But out he goes, and now. Well, guess what? Every single person who got that speech paid up. No one wanted to go through the hassle of finding another place (we were awfully convenient, sharing a fence with the racetrack). And after that, it was the rare person who ever fell behind again. They quickly realized that someone else had to go into the payment lottery next month. Our bill had to be paid.