Sinco, Inc. v. Metro-North Commuter R. Co.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
133 F.Supp. 2d 308 (2001)
After Sinco's (plaintiff) fall-protection Sayflink sleeves crumbled during inspection at Grand Central Terminal, Metro-North (defendant) issued a default notice under a contract giving Sinco seven days to cure; Sinco delivered replacement sleeves along with a video of a single stress test on only one type of sleeve, which Metro-North rejected as insufficient proof of reliability, and subsequent proposals by Sinco (independent testing, further tests, sleeves from another manufacturer) were likewise rejected before Metro-North terminated the contract, prompting Sinco's breach-of-contract suit and Metro-North's counterclaim.
Whether, under the UCC, a seller may cure a material breach by promptly making available to the buyer a product that conforms to all contract requirements.