THE FACTS OF THE SCENARIO

Facts — Cloverdyke Dairy Cooperative v. Brandt Refrigeration Systems, LLC

Every labelled fact below is the single source the pages are generated from. Change a value here and everything rendered from it follows on the next publish; passages that restate it in prose are found and drafted for review, never changed silently.

Caption restated in 3 passages (each needs its own edit)

Cloverdyke Dairy Cooperative v. Brandt Refrigeration Systems, LLC

Open date restated in 3 passages (each needs its own edit)

2026-03-16

As of date restated in 4 passages (each needs its own edit)

2026-06-30

Client name restated in 32 passages (each needs its own edit)

Cloverdyke Dairy Cooperative

Matter summary not yet mentioned in the prose

Farmer-owned dairy co-op seeks recovery against equipment seller Brandt Refrigeration Systems, LLC after a new $96,000 bulk milk-cooling unit failed to hold temperature three times in its first two months, spoiling milk. UCC Article 2 breach-of-warranty and remedies dispute; limited-remedy warranty disclaims consequential damages; mediation then binding arbitration contemplated per the agreement.

Intake date not yet mentioned in the prose

2026-03-13

Referral source not yet mentioned in the prose

co-op board member referral (prior firm client)

Result restated in 6 passages (each needs its own edit)

clear

Notes not yet mentioned in the prose

No current or former representation of Brandt Refrigeration Systems, LLC, Sylvia Brandt, or Larkspur Creamery. Prior closed matter for this client (m22) reviewed; no positional conflict. Independent engineer Rask is a retained consultant, not adverse.

Checked date not yet mentioned in the prose

2026-03-14

Rate not yet mentioned in the prose

250

Engagement date restated in 3 passages (each needs its own edit)

2026-03-16

Adding a fact records it here first — it appears in the prose only through drafted mentions you approve.