From our private database of 14,200+ case briefs...
Wiseco, Inc. v. Johnson Controls, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
WL 2931896 (2005)
Johnson Controls, Inc. (JCI) (defendant) produced headrest stays for certain DaimlerChrysler vehicles. In December 1998, JCI made an oral requirements agreement with Wiseco, Inc. (Wiseco) (plaintiff), a tool-and-die company, to produce certain parts. The work involved bending metal rods into a staple shape and rounding the ends, forming part 684F. Wiseco was to prepare the necessary equipment at its own expense and maintain a capacity to manufacture 4,000 parts per day. The number ordered would depend on the needs of DaimlerChrysler. The parts were to last at least four years, and Wiseco understood that period of time to be the contract term. For six months, Wiseco produced approximately 4,000 parts per day at JCI’s request. Such parts were then sent to JCI’s plant in Kentucky for finishing before being sent to JCI’s plant in Canada for final assembly. After the first six months, JCI’s orders for part 684F decreased substantially. At the same time, however, JCI requested Wiseco to perform the finishing work on part 684F, creating a part known as 684B. Eventually, that work fell off as well. JCI attributed the decline to changes in the headrests used by DaimlerChrysler. The newer headrests required a longer rod with additional notches and a pointed end. The manufacture of such parts was performed by a Canadian company near JCI’s final assembly plant. In May 2001, Wiseco filed suit against JCI for breach of contract. The trial court granted summary judgment to JCI on the grounds that JCI had reduced its requirements for part 684 in good faith and had otherwise complied with the agreement. Wiseco appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Sutton, 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 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.
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 238,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 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.