Contract established by memorandum, correspondence, and agreement despite indefinite quantity term.

- Where the evidence demonstrated that both parties intended a requirements contract based on purchaser's good faith needs for the trademarked yarns and the existence of this contract was established by a memorandum, the correspondence between the parties, and a trademark licensing agreement which was to remain in effect subject to cancellation by either party on 90 days' notice, the indefiniteness of the written quantity term did not invalidate the contract. O.N. Jonas Co. v. Badische Corp., 706 F.2d 1161 (11th Cir. 1983).

Actual requirements disproportionate to estimation.

- Where quantity actually delivered and accepted to meet requirements of the buyer is unreasonably disproportionate to estimated requirements, the lot price for estimated total requirements is not a lot price for actual requirements, although it may serve to establish a unit price therefor. Romine, Inc. v. Savannah Steel Co., 117 Ga. App. 353, 160 S.E.2d 659 (1968).

Good faith duty to perform.

- Where plaintiffs entered into a three-year "Output and Requirements Contract and Security Agreement" with defendant, under which defendant was to furnish all the supplies, materials, labor, advice, etc., needed to produce and harvest pecans from pecan groves owned and leased by plaintiffs and to market all the pecans produced from the groves, regardless of whether this contract fell under O.C.G.A. §§ 11-2-306 or13-4-20, defendant had a duty to perform in good faith. Flynn v. Gold Kist, Inc., 181 Ga. App. 637, 353 S.E.2d 537 (1987).

Where under a contract to produce, harvest and market pecans from plaintiffs' groves, plaintiffs claimed that they were overcharged for oil and lubricants, while defendant was not required under the contract to purchase these products at the lowest possible price, it was required to exercise good faith in making these purchases. Flynn v. Gold Kist, Inc., 181 Ga. App. 637, 353 S.E.2d 537 (1987).

Contract promising to purchase "seed which, from time to time, [buyer] reasonably requires" was not promise to purchase exclusively from seller and did not support seller's reciprocal promise to supply all of buyer's needs for seed; thus, no valid "requirements contract" was created. Billings Cottonseed, Inc. v. Albany Oil Mill, Inc., 173 Ga. App. 825, 328 S.E.2d 426 (1985).

Supply contract clause of a real estate sales contract providing that the parties would enter into a supply contract, whereby the buyer would purchase gasoline from the seller for 10 years at a cost of one cent per gallon above the seller's cost, could not be considered a valid "requirements" contract because it did not provide that the buyer would obtain gasoline from the seller exclusively. Smith Serv. Oil Co. v. Parker, 250 Ga. App. 270, 549 S.E.2d 485 (2001).

Contract in restraint of trade unenforceable.

- Oral agreement between a manufacturer and distributor for the manufacture and sale of fertilizer was unenforceable because it did not contain any territorial limitations on the distributor's exclusive sales rights. PCS Joint Venture, Ltd. v. Davis, 219 Ga. App. 519, 465 S.E.2d 713 (1995).

Cited in Harris v. Hine, 232 Ga. 183, 205 S.E.2d 847 (1974); Duval & Co. v. Malcom, 233 Ga. 784, 214 S.E.2d 356 (1975); R.L. Kimsey Cotton Co. v. Ferguson, 233 Ga. 962, 214 S.E.2d 360 (1975); Cox Caulking & Insulating Co. v. Brockett Distrib. Co., 150 Ga. App. 424, 258 S.E.2d 51 (1979); Integrated Micro Sys. v. NEC Home Elec. (USA), Inc., 174 Ga. App. 197, 329 S.E.2d 554 (1985); Halley v. Harden Oil Co., 182 Ga. App. 784, 357 S.E.2d 138 (1987); Roboserve, Ltd. v. Tom's Foods, Inc., 940 F.2d 1441 (11th Cir. 1991); Peach State Meat Co. v. Excel Corp., 860 F. Supp. 849 (M.D. Ga. 1994).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 67 Am. Jur. 2d, Sales, §§ 288, 289.

6 Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Commercial Code, § 2:143.

C.J.S.

- 77A C.J.S., Sales, §§ 178, 179.

U.L.A.

- Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 2-306.

ALR.

- Divisibility of contract to furnish material for a specific construction, 2 A.L.R. 687.

Rights and remedies upon cancelation of sales agency, 32 A.L.R. 209; 52 A.L.R. 546; 89 A.L.R. 252.

Duty of principal to fill orders under sales-agency contract, 52 A.L.R. 557.

Restrictive agreements or covenants in respect of purchase or handling of petroleum products by operator of filling station, 26 A.L.R.2d 219.

Construction and effect of contract for sale of commodity to fill buyer's requirements, 26 A.L.R.2d 1099.

Mutuality and enforceability of contract to furnish another with his needs, wants, desires, requirements and the like, of certain commodities, 26 A.L.R.2d 1139.

Requirements contracts under § 2-306(1) of Uniform Commercial Code, 96 A.L.R.3d 1275.

Output contracts under § 2-306(1) of Uniform Commercial Code, 30 A.L.R.4th 396.

Establishment and construction of requirements contracts under § 2-306(1) of Uniform Commercial Code, 94 A.L.R.5th 247.