Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Farnsworth
Nanakuli Paving & Rock Co. v. Shell Oil Co.
ProfessorMelissa A. Hale
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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:
Plaintiff, a large paving contractor in Hawaii, purchased all of its requirements for asphalt from Defendant under two supply contracts between 1963 and 1974. The written contract provided that the price for the asphalt would be the price posted at the time of delivery. Asphaltic paving contractors in Hawaii bid work at fixed prices and commonly received price protection from their suppliers because government agencies would not accept price escalation clauses in their contracts with the pavers. In 1970 and 1971, Defendant raised its price for asphalt, but protected Plaintiff from the price increase for several months after each announced increase. In 1974, Defendant raised its price for asphalt with one day notice to Plaintiff, and did not offer price protection. Plaintiff sued for breach of its 1969 contract with the Defendant. The jury found in favor of the Plaintiff, but the trial court set aside the verdict. The Court of Appeals reversed and reinstated the jury’s verdict.
- 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.