Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Burton
Bak-a-lum Corp. of America v. ALCOA Bldg. Prods., Inc
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
Defendant, ALCOA Bldg. Prods., Inc., manufactures aluminum siding products. Plaintiff, Bak-a-lum Corp. of America, is an exclusive distributor of Defendant’s products since 1962 or 1963, based on a verbal agreement with Defendant. Thereafter, Defendant terminated agreement in January 1970 when Defendant hired four additional distributors in the same area geographically. Also, Plaintiff had just entered into a new lease that gave Plaintiff a substantially enlarged warehouse facility to use to distribute Defendant’s products. Plaintiff brought suit against Defendant for breach of contract. At trial, Plaintiff produced evidence that indicated Defendant’s actions in terminating the exclusive distributorship agreement would result in a $10,000 loss of profits for Plaintiff. Further, the trial court ruled that there was a binding and enforceable agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant. Also, the trial court held that the agreement was only terminable after a reasonable period of time and on reasonable notice was given to the other party. Additionally, the trial court held that Defendant purposefully withheld its decision to break the exclusive distributorship agreement Plaintiff to avoid Plaintiff’s zealous distribution of Defendant’s products. Likewise, based on the agreement, the trial court held that a reasonable period time had passed on the contract, and concluded that a reasonable notice to Plaintiff is seven months. The trial court determined Plaintiff’s lost profits to be $5,000 monthly and provided Plaintiff $35,000 in damages. Both parties appealed.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.