GRANDIS FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LTD. v. HESS CORP. Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A company sought to enforce an arbitration clause located on its website, which was referenced in purchase orders issued after a master contract was signed. The court refused, finding the master contract’s generic reference to “purchase orders” was too vague to incorporate the external arbitration term.
Legal Significance: This case illustrates New York’s strict standard for incorporation by reference, holding that a vague, generic reference to a common business document is insufficient to bind a party to material, unattached terms like an arbitration clause, especially when an integrated contract already exists.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Hess Corporation and Advanced Power Technologies (APT) entered into a comprehensive, 91-page written contract for a lighting renovation project. The contract contained a detailed list of documents incorporated by reference, an integration clause, and a New York choice-of-law provision, but it did not include an arbitration clause. Schedule C of the contract, which detailed payment procedures, made a generic, lower-case reference to the need for “a purchase order” before payment could be processed. After the main contract was executed, Hess began issuing purchase orders (POs) for the work. The face of these POs included a bolded statement directing the recipient to a website for additional terms and conditions. This website contained a mandatory arbitration clause. When a dispute arose, APT sued Hess for breach of contract in Florida. Hess removed the case to federal court and filed a motion to compel arbitration, arguing that the arbitration clause from its website was incorporated into the main contract via the reference to purchase orders in Schedule C. APT contended it never agreed to arbitrate and was unaware of the terms on the website.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Under New York law, does a contract’s generic reference to “a purchase order” in a payment schedule suffice to incorporate by reference an arbitration clause contained on a website linked in separately issued purchase orders?
No. The court denied the motion to compel arbitration, holding that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pari
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Under New York law, does a contract’s generic reference to “a purchase order” in a payment schedule suffice to incorporate by reference an arbitration clause contained on a website linked in separately issued purchase orders?
Conclusion
This case serves as a strong precedent on the limits of incorporation Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco labo
Legal Rule
Under New York law, for a separate document to be incorporated by Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis focused on whether the parties had formed an agreement Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut al
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Under New York law, an arbitration clause on a website linked