¶ … agree court's decision? Is court's interpretation Article There are a number of factors to consider when seeking to determine whether or not justice was served in the 2008 court case Sky Cast Inc. v. Global District Distribution. The crux of this case is that the plaintiff, which is based in Canada, was supplying light poles to the defendant, which is based in the United States, for several years prior to a dispute that arose in 2006. During that year Sky Cast Inc. delivered light poles to Global District Distribution's clients in Florida. However, the defendant claims that the poles were not delivered in a timely fashion, and that it incurred damages due to that fact -- which was also the primary reason it severed ties with Sky Cast Inc. despite owing the latter an $80,000 balance.

After considering a number of factors that were relevant to this case and to the nature of the relationship of the two aforementioned parties, it was determined that Sky Cast Inc.'s motion for summary judgment was valid, due to the fact...

These facts are not in dispute, not even by the defendant, which is why it appears that in this particular aspect of this case, justice was indeed served. However, Sky Cast Inc. also sought to legal action against Global District Distribution due to what it perceived as "negligent misrepresentation" on its part by dissolving its Florida-based company and relocating its headquarters to Kentucky under a slightly different name. In doing so, Global District Distribution avowed to Florida legal officials that the company had no outstanding debts. This case set a precedent in determining that negligent misrepresentation is actually a tort claim which is separate from breach of contract. Litigation for the latter may be pursued through Contracts on International Sale of Goods (CISG), while the former is determined by individual states. In that regards, it seems both logical and within reason that the court would rule out Sky Cast…