This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
AND v. Alyeska: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
Alyeska replied with its own letter of intent without specifying a price. | Alyeska replied with its own letter of intent without specifying a price. | ||
In phone conversations, the 2 parties agreed to reimburse Alyeska for 65% of its price. | |||
In March 1977, the owners committee of Alyeska rejected the proposed transaction of Caterpillar surplus parts. | |||
|procedural_history=AND sued Alyeska for breach of contract. | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://law.justia.com/cases/alaska/supreme-court/1983/6353-1.html | |link=https://law.justia.com/cases/alaska/supreme-court/1983/6353-1.html | ||
Revision as of 16:23, July 17, 2023
| AND v. Alyeska | |
| Court | Alaska Supreme Court |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | June 10, 1983 |
Facts
Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. ("Alyeska") was a joint venture owned by several oil companies.
Alyeska would transport oil from the northern to the southern parts of Alaska. It purchase a lot of construction supplies.
Alyeska asked AND for a letter of proposal for the surplus contruction supplies.
Alaska Northern Development, Inc. ("AND") (plaintiff) was a contracting company.
In 1976, AND contacted Alyeska to purchase Alyeska's surplus construction supplies.
On December 11th 1976, AND sent a letter of intent to Alyeska to purchase its entire Caterpillar parts. This letter omitted a purchase price.
Alyeska replied with its own letter of intent without specifying a price.
In phone conversations, the 2 parties agreed to reimburse Alyeska for 65% of its price.
In March 1977, the owners committee of Alyeska rejected the proposed transaction of Caterpillar surplus parts.
