Nike International Ltd. v. Athletic Sales, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• dealer’s failure to comply with contractual requirement for written notice of renewal was an omission that left it unprotected by Act 75
• Law 75 should not be interpreted to create a “safe-haven for dealers to avoid the express terms of the contracts to which they willingly subscribed.”
• Act 75 cannot protect a dealer from his own omissions to follow contractual terms
• “[N]ot only did the contract contain this integrated agreement provision, it also 12 provided that no terms could be waived, changed or otherwise modified except in writing and 13 signed by the party against whom the waiver, change, or modification was to be enforced.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).