POWER OF BLOGS

Insight Center: Blogs

Supreme Court of North Dakota: Where Contract Provided That Either Party Could Cancel Upon 30 Days' Notice, the Non-Breaching Party Seeking Lost Profits Could Only Recover the Lost Profits it Would Have Earned During the Notice Period

Cont'l Res. v. P&P Indus., LLC, 2018 N.D. Lexis 20 (January 22, 2018)

Author: R. Zachary Torres-Fowler

3/08/2018

Read the full post at Constructlaw

Supreme Court of North Dakota: Where Contract Provided That Either Party Could Cancel Upon 30 Days' Notice, the Non-Breaching Party Seeking Lost Profits Could Only Recover the Lost Profits it Would Have Earned During the Notice Period

In 2013, Continental Resources Inc. (Continental), an oil producer doing business in North Dakota, entered into a master servicing agreement, governed by Oklahoma law, with United Oilfield Services (United). According to the contract, United agreed to provide transportation, water hauling, and related support services to Continental in support of Continental’s ongoing operations in North Dakota. The contract also contained the following termination provision: “[I]t being understood and agreed that either party hereto may cancel this Contract by giving the other party thirty (30) days written notice of such cancellation.”

Data protection laws have changed, so we have revised our Privacy Policy.

CLOSE