From our private database of 28,700+ case briefs...
Colfax Envelope Corp. v. Local No. 458-3M
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
20 F.3d 750 (1994)
Colfax Envelope Corp. (Colfax) (plaintiff) hired employees to operate its two printing presses. These employees were represented by Local No. 458-3M (the union) (defendant). Previously, the union would negotiate a collective-bargaining agreement with the Chicago Lithographers Association (CLA) and send a summary of the terms to Colfax for approval. If Colfax did not agree with those terms, it had the right to negotiate separately. The collective-bargaining agreement set the minimum manning requirements for each type of printing press. Colfax had two presses that were 78 inches wide and, under the existing collective-bargaining agreement, had to be manned by four employees each. When a summary of the newest changes to the agreement was sent to Colfax, the summary listed one of the manning requirements as “4C 60 Press-3 Men,” which Colfax interpreted as requiring presses 60 inches or wider to be manned by three employees. Finding this advantageous, Colfax agreed to the changes in the summary. Upon receiving the final agreement, Colfax learned that “4C 60 Press-3 Men” meant three men were required for presses of 60 inches or less. Colfax sought a declaration stating that no collective-bargaining agreement was created due to lack of agreement on an essential term. The union sought to compel arbitration because the agreement contained an arbitration clause. The district court ordered arbitration, finding that the contract was enforceable because the disputed term unambiguously referred only to 60-inch presses. Colfax appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Posner, C.J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 546,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,700 briefs, keyed to 983 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.