Appeal, No. 34, Jan. T., 1951, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming County, Dec. T., 1946, No. 390, in case of C.I. Price v. Zehnder H. Confair et al., trading as Confair Bottling Co., otherwise known as Confair Bottling Company. Judgment affirmed.
John C. Youngman, with him Candor, Youngman & Gibson, for appellant.
No appearance was made nor brief submitted for appellees.
Before Drew, C.j., Stearne, Bell, Ladner and Chidsey, JJ.
OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE BELL
Defendants made a written contract with Cloverdale Spring Co. on January 17, 1941, in which defendants agreed, inter alia, to furnish to seven named distributors, one of whom was the plaintiff, "all of their requirements of bottled Pepsi-Cola". The contract was silent as to its duration and the sole question involved in the case is as to the period of the contract.
For many years prior to 1941 Cloverdale Spring Co. had granted the defendant bottling rights on a royalty basis, retaining however, the right to sell Pepsi-Cola to wholesalers and distributors in a certain area. On January 17, 1941, Cloverdale and Confair entered into a written agreement by the terms of which Confair paid Cloverdale $22,500. in lieu of all royalty payments previously contracted for and Cloverdale gave up its distribution rights in Confair's territory, there-by making Confair the exclusive bottler and distributor of Pepsi-Cola in the Williamsport area.
In order to protect Cloverdale's old customers, the contract provided: "3. The Bottler further agrees to sell to the above mentioned seven (7) distributors all their requirements of bottled Pepsi-Cola at the price of sixty cents (60 ) per case delivered to the distributors' premises or at the distributors' option at the price of fifty-seven cents (57 ) per case at the Bottler's platform in Williamsport, plus the prevailing deposit, contingent upon the above mentioned seven (7) distributors selling Pepsi-Cola for the same price and subject to the same terms and practices as the Bottler."
The contract contained no provision as to the period of time defendants would provide plaintiff and other distributors "all of their requirements of bottled Pepsi-Cola"; and the contract did not require plaintiff to purchase any specific number of cases or bottler of Pepsi-Cola annually or to continue their purchases from the defendants for any period of time whatsoever. Furthermore, the plaintiff paid nothing and gave no consideration for this contract.
Defendants furnished all of plaintiff's requirements during 1941. Plaintiff claimed that by January 1, 1942 and ever since he had built up his requirements to 100 ...