United Roasters, Inc. v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.
649 F.2d 985, 32 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 988 (1981)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A party's cessation of performance of its contractual duties before the effective date of termination constitutes a breach of contract, which is a separate and distinct claim from a breach of an implied duty of good faith in the timing of the termination notice. An intentional breach of contract, without substantial aggravating circumstances such as deception at the time of formation, does not constitute an "unfair or deceptive act or practice" under N.C.G.S. § 75-1.1.
Facts:
- In 1973, United Roasters, Inc. contracted with Colgate Palmolive Co. for Colgate to manufacture and distribute Bambéanos, a roasted soybean snack.
- The contract allowed Colgate to terminate at its sole discretion with thirty days' written notice during an initial test-marketing period.
- In December 1975, Colgate announced its intention to merge with Riviana Foods, Inc., a large food processing company.
- Between January and May 1976, while the contract was still in effect, Colgate ceased production of Bambéanos, substantially stopped all advertising, transferred the product manager, and sold its entire inventory of raw soybeans and finished product.
- On July 19, 1976, Colgate orally notified United Roasters that it was terminating the contract, sending written confirmation on August 27.
Procedural Posture:
- United Roasters, Inc. filed a diversity action against Colgate Palmolive Co. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
- At trial, the court required the plaintiff to elect between its claim for bad faith termination and its claim for non-performance of contract duties; the plaintiff proceeded on the bad faith theory.
- A jury returned a special verdict finding that Colgate acted in bad faith by failing to give prompt notice of its decision to terminate and awarded damages.
- The district court entered judgment on the jury's verdict but denied United Roasters' motion for treble damages under N.C.G.S. § 75-1.1.
- Both United Roasters and Colgate filed cross-appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a party with an unconditional right to terminate a contract breach an implied duty of good faith by failing to give immediate notice of its internal decision to terminate, where the party also ceases performance of its contractual duties before the termination becomes effective?
Opinions:
Majority - Haynsworth, Senior Circuit Judge
No. The court holds that the actionable wrong was not Colgate's failure to promptly communicate its decision to terminate, but its cessation of performance before the termination was effective. Colgate had an express contractual obligation to use its best efforts to promote the product, and by stopping manufacturing, advertising, and selling its inventory, it breached its duty of good faith performance. The court affirms the damage award on this alternative theory of a simple breach of contract, finding it unnecessary to decide whether North Carolina law imposes a good faith limitation on the exercise of an unconditional termination right. The court also affirms the denial of treble damages, reasoning that an intentional breach of contract between sophisticated parties, without aggravating circumstances like deception at formation, does not rise to the level of an 'unfair or deceptive act' under N.C.G.S. § 75-1.1.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies that the duty of good faith performance is ongoing and requires a party to fulfill its contractual obligations up until the moment of effective termination. The court strategically reframes the dispute from a novel and uncertain claim of 'bad faith termination notice' to a traditional breach of performance claim, thereby holding the breaching party liable without creating a new, potentially disruptive precedent regarding termination rights. Furthermore, the ruling limits the scope of North Carolina's unfair trade practices statute in business-to-business disputes, signaling that ordinary, even intentional, breaches of contract are not what the consumer-protection-oriented statute is designed to punish with treble damages.
Unlock the full brief for United Roasters, Inc. v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.