An Alabama judge has rejected an vape distributor’s request for a summary judgment against a wholesaler

A federal judge in the U.S. state of Alabama has rejected a lawsuit filed by vape distributors, saying there are so many substantive disputes to resolve that they can’t quickly end the case by simplifying it.


A federal judge in Alabama has denied a request for summary judgment by a vape distributor who claimed a wholesaler failed to pay more than $100,000 in delivery invoices.


In a brief order, Judge Annemarie Kahne-Axon SafaGoodsLLC said it had not provided uncontested evidence to support its decision on PerfectWholesaleInc. Claim, the trial must continue.


According to the directive, there are currently several contentious issues, including whether the invoice represents a valid contract, whether Safa fulfilled the contract, whether PerfectWholesale accepted the goods, and whether the price was determined.


Akerson did not discuss further why she denied the motion.


In August, Safa sued PerfectWholesale, claiming that PerfectWholesale shipped goods to the wholesaler between October and December 2021 and that PerfectWholesale was owed $158,745 as of the last shipment.


According to the complaint, Safa provided PerfectWholesale with a $55,200 credit in February 2022, and to date, the wholesaler is still owed $103,545 and has not paid in response to a letter demanding payment.


In its motion for summary judgment, Safa argued that the invoice was a valid contract that was breached by Perfect Wholesale and was impaired by PerfectWholesale’s failure to pay.


In response, PerfectWholesale argued that the invoice was not a contract, that Safa did not perform properly, that some of the products claimed by Safa were not purchased, and that the prices or delivery of other products ordered were incorrect.


PerfectWholesale also filed a motion to strike the evidential display attached to Safa’s response to PerfectWholesale’s objections, saying Safa was not verified when it found the document in that display and cannot now be entered as evidence