Commerce & Industry Ins. Co. v. Bayer Corp.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
742 N.E.2d 567 (2001)
- Written by Megan Schwarz, JD
Facts
Malden Mills and Bayer Corporation (Bayer) (defendant) entered into an agreement for the sale of nylon tow. The Malden Mills purchase order sent to Bayer contained an arbitration provision. The Bayer invoice sent to Malden Mills was silent regarding arbitration and expressly conditioned Malden Mills’ acceptance of any order on their acceptance of any additional or conflicting terms in the Bayer invoice. Following a fire destroying a Malden Mills building, the company’s insurers, Commerce and Industry Insurance Company (Commerce & Industry) (plaintiff) sued Bayer claiming that the nylon tow sold to Malden Mills by Bayer was the cause of the fire. Bayer argued that the Malden Mills arbitration provision applied to the dispute and additionally stated that Malden Mills should be equitably estopped from refusing to apply the arbitration provision. The trial court held that the arbitration provision was unenforceable and rejected Bayer’s argument that Malden Mills should be equitably estopped. Bayer appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Greaney, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 791,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
