Beromun Aktiengesellschaft v. Societa Industriale Agricola “Tresse” (SIAT)
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
471 F. Supp. 1163 (1979)
- Written by Whitney Waldenberg, JD
Facts
Beromun Aktiengesellschaft (Beromun) (plaintiff), a Liechtenstein corporation, filed an action in federal district court against Societa Industriale Agricola “Tresse” (SIAT) (defendant), an Italian partnership, seeking to compel SIAT to participate in arbitration over an alleged breach of a contract for the sale of several thousand tons of corn. In October 1974, Beromun and SIAT exchanged a series of confusing phone calls and telexes while negotiating the sale of the corn. Beromun alleged that Beromun and SIAT eventually had reached an oral agreement, which was subsequently confirmed by telex. Beromun further alleged that the terms contained in the North American Export Grain Association Form Number 2—which contained an arbitration clause—had been adopted by the parties via telex and incorporated into the purchase agreement. SIAT, in turn, alleged that there had been no meeting of the minds, and therefore, no contract had ever been formed. Specifically, SIAT pointed to evidence that the parties had disagreed over the use of the term “one vessel” in the contract, which would have been a material term. SIAT filed a motion to dismiss Beromun’s suit on the ground that there was no agreement to arbitrate.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Werker, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
