Baldwin Piano, Inc. v. Deutsche Wurlitzer Gmbh

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the presumption stands “unless the parties clearly provide otherwise,” and describing Jespersen as articulating a “clear-statement rule[]”
• holding that specific language of the contract placed “substantive restrictions” on the “reasons for termination” of the agreement between the parties
• “The presumption of terminability allows separation in the business world, unless the parties clearly provide otherwise.”
• “Because these long-term rela- tions produce continuing profits for both sides, both have something to lose by taking the exit option without trying to work out differences first.”
• “Businesses are not compelled to make sensible bargains, but courts should not demolish the economic basis of bargains that would be sound if the contract were given a natural reading.”
• “To interpret a contract or other document, it is not enough to have a command of the ... language in which the document is written. One must know something about the practical ... context of the language to be interpreted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).