Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Columbia Nitrogen Corp. v. Royster Co.

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
451 F.2d 3 (1971)


Facts

Columbia Nitrogen Corp. (Columbia) (defendant), a nitrogen and mixed fertilizer manufacturer, sold its products to Royster Co. (Royster) (plaintiff) for several years. In 1966, Royster began to manufacture phosphate. Columbia agreed to purchase a minimum amount from Royster for three years. The contract set the price per ton and contained a merger clause that excluded any “verbal understanding” from the terms of the contract. When phosphate prices dropped steeply in the first year of the contract, Columbia failed to purchase the agreed amount and Royster was forced to sell the remaining phosphate at a lower price. Royster sued Columbia for damages. Columbia attempted to present evidence showing that Columbia and Royster, in their prior dealings, often deviated from the contract price. Columbia also proffered evidence that price and quantity terms in the mixed fertilizer industry were treated as projections and were subject to modification according to market fluctuations. The district court excluded Columbia’s evidence of prior dealing and trade usage. Judgment was entered for Royster and Columbia appealed the district court’s exclusion of its evidence.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Butzner, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. 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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.