Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Burton
Frigaliment Importing Co. v. B.N.S. International Sales Corp.
Citation:190 F. Supp. 116
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:
After meeting at the World Trade Fair, Frigaliment Importing Company (hereinafter “Frigaliment”) (plaintiff) entered into two contracts with B.N.S. International Sales Corporation (hereinafter “B.N.S.”) (defendant) for the sale of fresh frozen, grade A, government-inspected chicken. The two companies negotiated the deal mostly in German. Friglament intended for the English term “chicken” to refer to a young chicken that was suitable for broiling and frying, or broilers. B.N.S., on the other hand, believed that the German term for “chicken” (“huhn”) referred to stewing chicken, or fowl. When the first shipment of chicken arrived, Figaliment found that the birds, although they met the size specifications in the contract, were stewing chicken. Frigaliment informed B.N.S. of the issue, but still allowed B.N.S. to send the second shipment. The birds in the second shipment were again stewing chicken. Frigaliment sued B.N.S. for breach of warranty, contending that the chicken sold did not correspond to its description in the contract.
- 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.