Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Summers
Nanakuli Paving and Rock Co. v. Shell Oil Co., Inc.
Citation:664 F.2d 772
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:
From 1963 to 1974, Nanakuli Paving and Rock Company (“Nanakuli”) (plaintiff) purchased all of its asphalt from Shell Oil Company, Inc. (“Shell”) (defendant) under two long-term supply contracts. In 1974, Nanakuli alleged that Shell breached its 1969 contract by failing to price-protect Nanakuli. For several years, Shell had kept its asphalt prices consistent. But when Nanakuli ordered 7,200 tons of asphalt in 1974, Shell raised the price for asphalt from $44 to $76. Nanakuli argued that price-protection was routinely used in the asphaltic paving trade in Hawaii and it assumed price-protection (although not an express term of their contract) had been incorporated into its 1969 contract with Shell. Moreover, Nanakuli argued that Shell had provided price-protection on two previous occasions. Shell alleged that their contract only provided that it would charge its “posted price” for the asphalt, which permitted it to double the price of asphalt.
- 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.