Nanakuli Paving & Rock Co. v. Shell Oil Co. 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 paving company sued its asphalt supplier for breach of contract after a massive price hike. Despite a written price term of “posted price at delivery,” the court found an implied term of “price protection” based on industry-wide trade usage and the parties’ prior course of performance.
Legal Significance: This case is a landmark in U.C.C. interpretation, demonstrating how trade usage and course of performance can supplement and qualify even seemingly unambiguous express contract terms, provided they are not a complete negation of those terms.
Nanakuli Paving & Rock Co. v. Shell Oil Co. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Nanakuli Paving & Rock Co. (Nanakuli), an asphaltic paving contractor, had a long-term requirements contract to purchase all its asphalt from Shell Oil Co. (Shell). The written contract specified the price as “Shell’s Posted Price at time of delivery.” In the Hawaiian asphaltic paving trade, it was a universal practice for material suppliers to “price protect” contractors. This meant holding the old price for tonnage already committed to projects when prices increased, because government contracts did not have escalation clauses. Shell itself had price protected Nanakuli on the only two prior occasions of price increases under the contract, in 1970 and 1971. In 1974, amidst the Arab oil embargo, Shell abruptly raised its asphalt price from $44 to $76 per ton with virtually no notice and refused to price protect Nanakuli for 7,200 tons of asphalt already committed to specific projects. Nanakuli sued for breach of contract, arguing that price protection was an unwritten part of their agreement based on trade usage and course of performance.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Under the Uniform Commercial Code, can a trade usage and course of performance establishing a practice of price protection be incorporated into a contract, even when the express written term sets the price at the seller’s posted price at the time of delivery?
Yes. The court reversed the judgment n.o.v. and reinstated the jury verdict 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 n
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 the Uniform Commercial Code, can a trade usage and course of performance establishing a practice of price protection be incorporated into a contract, even when the express written term sets the price at the seller’s posted price at the time of delivery?
Conclusion
Nanakuli is a foundational case for understanding how the U.C.C. prioritizes 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
Legal Rule
Under U.C.C. §§ 1-205 and 2-208, the express terms of 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 o
Legal Analysis
The Ninth Circuit's analysis centered on the U.C.C.'s liberal approach to defining 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 aliquip ex
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Under the UCC, trade usage and course of performance can add