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

Eskimo Pie Corp. v. Whitelawn Dairies, Inc.

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
284 F.Supp. 987 (S.D.N.Y. 1968)


Facts

On December 30, 1960, Eskimo Pie Corporation (Eskimo) (defendant) entered an integrated contract granting Whitelawn Dairies, Inc. (Whitelawn) (plaintiff) the right to manufacture ice cream products bearing Eskimo wrappers and labels, and granting Supermarket Advisory Sales, Inc. (SAS) the right to purchase and sell Eskimo products in the New York City (NYC) Metropolitan Area. The contract provided that Whitelawn and SAS would have the “non-exclusive” right to purchase and sell Eskimo products. Beginning in 1962 and 1963, Eskimo began selling its own products in the NYC Metropolitan Area and granted other manufacturers and distributors the right to make and sell its products. This led to mutual claims of breach of contract among the parties. At trial, Whitelawn and SAS sought to introduce parol evidence that the term “non-exclusive” essentially meant “exclusive,” subject to a few exceptions. According to Whitelawn and SAS, the parties agreed not to include a clause expressly limiting Eskimo’s ability to sell its own products and grant licenses to other companies, with the understanding that the term “non-exclusive” would encapsulate that meaning. Eskimo argued that parol evidence was barred.

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 (Mansfield, 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 174,000 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.