Contracts

Feld v. Henry S. Levy & Sons, Inc. — Study Notes

335 N.E.2d 320 (N.Y. 1975)

Study notes for Feld v. Henry S. Levy & Sons, Inc.: professor notes, cold call prep, exam angles, and memory aids.

A party to a requirements contract may cease performance when economic viability is compromised, provided that this decision is made in good faith.
Professor Notes

This case illustrates the principles of good faith and commercial reasonableness within the context of a requirements contract under the UCC. Professor might emphasize that even though requirements contracts provide for exclusivity, they do not require performance at any cost, especially when financial viability is at risk. The case underscores the necessity of balancing contractual obligations with the realities of the marketplace, highlighting the protection that UCC provisions offer to parties facing unforeseen economic challenges.

Additionally, professors may discuss the implications of the ruling on future requirements contracts, emphasizing how obligations may be interpreted in light of a party's ability to meet those demands. Understanding how good faith modifies performance under UCC is crucial for navigating contract disputes in practice, particularly in an industry subject to economic fluctuation.

Cold Call Prep
  1. 1What were the circumstances that led Levy to cease production of bread crumbs?
  2. 2Can a party to a contract unilaterally terminate their obligations based on profitability?
  3. 3What does good faith mean in the context of a requirements contract?
  4. 4How does this case illustrate the distinction between 'good faith' and 'commercial reasonableness'?
  5. 5What are the implications of this ruling for future contracts under the UCC?
  6. 6Discuss a relevant UCC provision that may apply to this case.
  7. 7How can parties protect themselves in requirements contracts?
Mnemonic Device

GRC - Good Reasonable Cease: emphasis on good faith and commercial reasonableness in contract performance.

Distinguish From
CaseDistinction
Nanakuli Paving & Rock Co. v. Shell Oil Co.In Nanakuli, the court emphasized a supplier's obligation to adhere to an established course of dealing, highlighting the distinction that regardless of market conditions, a supplier cannot simply stop providing goods without grounds.
Jannace v. L. Savino & Sons, Inc.In Jannace, it was held that cessation of performance must be commercially reasonable and consistent with good faith, but unlike Feld, the circumstances did not justify the cessation on grounds of financial challenges.
Policy Arguments

For the Rule

Allowing parties to cease production based on economic viability encourages honest business practices and recognizes the realities of the market.

Against the Rule

Permitting cessation could lead to opportunistic behavior, where parties exploit economic downturns at the expense of contractual commitments.

Class Discussion Points
  • How does the concept of good faith apply differently in various types of contracts?
  • In what situations might a court find a cessation of performance commercially unreasonable?
  • What measures can businesses take to mitigate risk when engaging in requirements contracts?
  • Discuss the role of economic factors in enforcing contracts.
  • How do these principles affect the negotiation of future contracts and business relationships?
Exam Angle

This case is often examined in the context of contractual obligations under the UCC, specifically focusing on good faith performance and changes in commercial viability. It tests students' understanding of the interplay between contractual duties and economic realities.

Ace Your Cold Calls with Briefly

Get AI-powered case briefs, study notes, and cold call prep for every case in your casebook.