06.09.2021 Views

American Contract Law for a Global Age, 2017a

American Contract Law for a Global Age, 2017a

American Contract Law for a Global Age, 2017a

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

eneficiary. A man can have only one wife. Much is said in the opinion as to the wrong<br />

done to the innocent woman whom he purported to marry. Nothing is said about the<br />

wrong done to the lawful wife.<br />

The contract in this case designates the “wife” as the one to whom the money<br />

was to be paid. I am unable to construe this word to mean anyone else than the only<br />

wife of Soper then living.<br />

_____________________<br />

Review Question 2. If, in the abstract, you read the word “wife” in an<br />

insurance policy, would you believe that it had a plain meaning? If the term does have<br />

a plain meaning, then what business does the court have in construing the contract<br />

any other way?<br />

Review Question 3. The W.W.W. Enterprises court says that it is improper to<br />

look at extrinsic evidence to determine whether a term is “ambiguous.” The Soper<br />

court seems to say that it is practically inevitable to do so. Can the cases be reconciled,<br />

or are we just looking at two different judicial philosophies? Incidentally, are the<br />

purported ambiguities in these two cases “latent” or are they “patent”? Why might<br />

the category of ambiguity involved matter?<br />

_____________________<br />

PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. v. SHELL OIL CO.<br />

United States District Court <strong>for</strong> the Eastern District of Louisiana<br />

727 F. Supp. 285 (E.D. La. 1989)<br />

HENRY A. MENTZ, U.S.D.J.<br />

On May 3, 1983, Shell and PPG entered into a contract <strong>for</strong> the sale of ethylene<br />

by Shell to PPG. On May 5, 1988, an explosion occurred at the Shell oil refinery in<br />

Norco, Louisiana. As a result of that explosion, Shell reduced the quantity of ethylene<br />

being delivered to PPG. Thereafter, on May 2, 1989, PPG instituted the present suit<br />

against Shell. PPG claims that Shell breached its contract by failing to deliver the<br />

specified quantities of ethylene following the Norco explosion. PPG seeks to recover<br />

its economic losses allegedly suffered as a result of Shell’s inability to per<strong>for</strong>m under<br />

the contract.<br />

A federal court sitting in diversity must apply the choice of law principles of<br />

the <strong>for</strong>um state. Thus, this Court is bound to apply the Louisiana choice of law rules.<br />

______________________________________________________________________________<br />

UNIT 18: THE INTERPRETIVE TOOLBOX 365

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!