Pavlik v. Consolidation Coal Co.

456 F.2d 378 (1972)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Pavlik v. Consolidation Coal Co.

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
456 F.2d 378 (1972)

Play video

Facts

Pavlik (plaintiff) granted Consolidation Coal Co. (defendant) an easement “for the purposes and with the rights of constructing, maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, replacing and removing one pipe line for the transportation of coal slurry.” The easement, which cost $995, would terminate if the pipeline ceased to be used “for the purpose set forth herein” for a period of one year. Consolidation supplied coal to the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (CEI) using the pipeline from 1957 to 1963. In 1963, Consolidation and CEI executed a supplemental agreement by which they put the pipeline into an inactive state, although Consolidation was obligated to maintain the pipeline in standby, ready to resume operations upon notice. Meanwhile, Consolidation and Pavlik agreed by a series of supplemental agreements to extend the one-year defeasance timeframe. They stipulated that they had negotiated to remove the defeasance clause and to allow the transmission of products other than coal slurry, and that the purpose of the extension was to “preserve the status quo” during negotiations. Negotiations failed and there were no more extensions after May 1967. Pavlik then sought a declaration of rights under the contract. The district judge held that the inactivity of the pipeline did not terminate the easement because it was kept ready to transport coal slurry. Pavlik appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Edwards, J.)

Dissent (McCree, J.)

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 789,000 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
  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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 789,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 789,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership