# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 6- 14 02

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Ri ta Lam ou reu x, as tru st ee o f th e Ri ta Lam ou reu x Tru st

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

MPS C, In c., als o k no wn as Mea t Pr oc es si ng Serv ic e Co rp or at io n, In c.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t Th ir d Pa rt

y Pla in ti ff - App el la nt

v.

Ri ta Lam ou reu x, i nd iv id ua ll y

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Th ir d Pa rt y Def en da nt - App el le e

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Nov em

be r 17 , 20 16
Fil ed : Fe br

ua ry 27 , 20 17

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re BENTON an d SHEPHERD, Ci rcu it Ju dg es , an d EBINGER, Dis tri ct Ju dg e. 1

__ __ __ __ __ __

The Hon or ab le Reb ecca Goo dg am e Ebi ng er, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r 1

th e So ut he rn Dis tri ct of I owa , si tt in g b y de si gn at io n.SHEPHERD, Cir cu it Ju dg e.

MPS C, In c. was a st art -u p co m pa ny wit h an i n n o va ti ve id ea— th e pa te nt ed

“ Ri ns e & Ch il l se rv ic e”

— b u t no cap it al

. An an ge l in ve st or , Jo hn Lam ou reu x,

pr ov id ed th e ne ces sa ry cap it al in ex ch an ge fo r a ro y al ty fee ev ery ti m e th e co m pa ny

us ed it s pa te nt ed se rv ic e. The co nt ract sp eci fie d th ree ev en ts t h a t wou ld te rm in at e

th e ag reem en t bu t di d no t sp eci fy a te rm in at io n dat e. MPS C no w as ks th e co ur ts to

su pp ly an at -wil l te rm in at io n te rm

. The di st ric t co ur t de cl in ed to do so

. W e affi rm

. 2

I. Back gr ou nd

MPS C is a Mi nn es ot a co r po rat io n in th e m eat -p ro ces si ng bu si ne ss wit h it s

pr in ci pa l pl ace of bu si ne ss in W is co ns in

. In th e 19 80 ’s, MPS C de ve lo pe d a ne w

m eat -p ro cess in g te ch ni qu e cal le d Ri ns e & Ch il l. The te ch ni qu e im pr ov ed th e am ou nt

an d qu al it y of th e m eat rem ov ed fro m th e an im al

. Bu t th e co m pa ny h ad a p r o b le m

fam il ia r to m an y st art -u ps : la ck of cap it al to fu nd t h e ir in no va ti on

. So MPS C

s o l i ci te d in ve st or s to pr ov id e th e ne ed ed cap it al

. Jo hn Lam ou reu x, a res id en t o f

Fl or id a, res po nd ed

.

The two pa rti es en te red in to an In ve st m en t Agr eem en t in 19 87

. The ag reem en t

cal le d for Lam ou reu x to pa y MPS C the am ou nt of $1 50 ,00 0. In ret ur n, he rece iv ed

th e “ rig ht s to $1 .50 pe r an im al pr oc es se d by MPS C, up to a m ax im um of th e fir st fiv e
hu nd red (5 00 ) an i mals pe r da y , fo r 26 0 da y s pe r y ear, as lo ng as th is ag reem en t

rem ai ns in effe ct .” Para gr ap h fi ve of t he ag reem en t d is cu ss es ter m in at io n even ts :

5. Thi s ag reem en t sh al l te rm in at e up on th e ha pp en in g of a n y of th e fo ll owi ng ev en ts :

The Hon or ab le Jo hn R. Tun he im

, Ch ie f Judg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r 2

th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta

.

-2

-(a) The di ss ol ut io n, ba nk ru pt cy , in so lv en cy or rece iv ers hi p o f

MPS C; (b ) The de m is e of th e le ga l ho ld er(s ) of th is ag reem en t un de r su ch
ci rcu m st an ces th at no su rv iv or or su rv iv or s of th e ho ld er(s ) can be
lo cat ed ; (c) W rit te n ag reem en t of MPS C an d th e l e g a l h ol de r(s ) of th is

ag reem en t.

The ag reem en t m ak es no m en ti on of a te rmi n a t i o n d a te

. It al so st at es th at “ MPS C

ag rees th ere sh al l be no res tri ct io n to th e tra ns fer of rig ht s gr an te d by th is ag reem en t.”

So m e 25 y ears la te r, MPS C de te rm in ed th at b e c a us e th e ag reem en t di d no t

co nt ai n a pr eci se te rm in at io n da te

, MPS C ha d th e rig ht to te rm in at e th e ag reem en t at

wil l aft er pr ov i d in g reas on ab le no ti ce. By th is ti m e, Jo hn Lam ou reu x ha d pa ss ed

away, su rv iv ed by hi s wife

, Ri ta

. In th e sp rin g of 20 13

, MPS C’s pr es id en t m et wit h

Ri ta an d no ti fie d he r of MPS C’s de te r m in at io n. MPS C ceas ed m ak in g pa y m en ts

sh or tl y th erea fte r.

Ri ta su bs eq ue nt ly fil ed a l a w su it al le gi ng br each of co nt ract in th e Uni te d

St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t f

o r th e Dis tri ct of Mi nn es ot a. The di st ric t co ur t ha d di ve rs it y juri sd ic ti on un de r 28 U.S.C. § 13 32

. MPS C co un te rcl ai m ed

, an d th en e a ch pa rty 3

m ov ed fo r su m

m ary jud gm en t. The di st ric t co ur t gr an te d su m m ary jud gm en t to Ri ta

an d aga in st MPS C. The co ur t firs t lo ok ed at th e ag reem en t’s te xt

, whi ch ex pr es se d

no te rm in at io n da te or ti m e pe rio d fo r th e pa y m en ts to co nt in ue

. Rat he r, th e di st ric t

co ur t no te d, th e ag reem en t sp el ls ou t th ree types of ev en ts

, an y of whi ch wou ld

te rm in at e th e ag reem en t. The co ur t no te d al so th at th e ag reem en t cal ls fo r pa y m en ts

to co nt in ue “ as lo ng as t hi s agre em en t rem ai ns in effe ct .” Tog et he r th e te rm in at io n

ev en ts an d th e “ as lo ng as ” la ng ua ge crea te d a cl ear du ty fo r MPS C to co n t i n ue

Thi s co un te rcl ai m in vo lv ed an in de m ni ty ag reem en t be twee n MPS C an d Ri ta 3

Lam ou reu x. The di st ric t co ur t he ld ag ai ns t MPS C on th is cl ai m , an d MPS C di d no t

ap pe al . So we d o n ot di sc us s t he in de m ni ty agree m en t o r an y

fact s re la te d t o i t.

-3

-pa y m en ts un ti l t h e o ccu rren ce of an y te rm in at io n ev en t, acco rd in g to th e di st ric t

co ur t. The co ur t th en co ns id ered Mi nn es ot a la w an d fo un d th at no sp eci fie d

te rm in at io n da te is req ui red whe n t h e ob li go r’s pe rfo rm an ce is co nd it io ne d on

co nd uc t wit hi n th e ob li go r’s co nt ro l. And si nc e MPS C ha s to ta l co nt ro l ov er whe th er

it pr oc es se s m eat

, th e di st ric t co ur t he ld th e ag reem en t va li d as writ te n; MPS C co ul d

no t t erm in at e th e in ve st m en t ag reem en t at wil l. MP SC n ow ap pe al s.

II. Dis cu ss io n

“ M i nn es ot a la w go ve rn s th is di ve rs it y act io n.” Fri ed be rg v. Ch ub b & So n,

In c., 69 1 F.3 d 94 8

, 95 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ). W e rev ie w a di st ric t co ur t’s gr an t of

su m m ary jud gm en t de no vo

. Kob us v. Co ll

. of St

. Sch ol as ti ca, In c., 60 8 F.3 d 10 34

, 10 35 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ). Su m m ary jud gm en t is ap pr op ria te whe n th ere are no gen ui ne
is su es of m at eri al fact an d th e m ov in g pa rty ca n d e mo n s t r a t e th at it is en ti tl ed to jud gm en t as a m at te r of la w. Fed . R . C iv . P . 5 6( a). Bo th pa rti es ag ree th ere are no

ge nu in e is su es of m at eri al fact in th is cas e. Onl y q u e s t i on s of la w—Mi nn es ot a

co nt ract law— are d is pu te d.

To pr op erl y in te rp ret a w r i t t en co nt ract

, we fir st ex am in e th e te xt of th e

co nt ract to id en ti fy

th e p art ie s’ in te nt . Dy

ke s v

. Su ku p M fg . Co., 7 81 N.W .2d 57 8,

58 2 (Mi nn

. 20 10 ). “ In te nt is as cert ai ne d, no t by a pr oc e s s o f d is se ct io n in whi ch

wor ds or ph ras es are is ol at ed fro m th ei r co nt ex t, bu t rat he r fro m a pr oc es s of
synth es is in whi ch th e wor ds an d ph ras es are gi ve n a m ean in g in acco rd an ce wit h th e
ob vi ou s pu rp os e of th e co nt ract

. . . a s a who le .” Mo to rs po rts Rac in g Pl us , In c. v.

Arct ic Cat Sal es , I n c

. , 6 66 N.W .2d 32 0, 32 4 (Mi nn

. 20 03 ) (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. U n a mb i g u ou s co nt ract la ng ua ge wil l be gi ve n it s pl ai n m ean in g. Sav el a v. Ci t y o f

Dul ut h, 8 06 N.W .2d 79 3, 7 96 -9 7 (M in n. 2 01 1)

.

-4

-I n th is cas e, th e In ve st m en t Agr eem en t un am bi gu ou sl y cal ls fo r MPS C’s

co nt in ue d pe rfo rm an ce fo r as lo ng as it pr oc es se s m eat

, un le ss on e of th e te rm in at io n

ev en ts oc cu rs . This is tru e fo r th ree k ey reas on s.

Fi rs t, th e te rm in at io n cl au se of fers no sp eci fic en d da te or du rat io n fo r MPS C’s

co nt ract ua l ob li ga ti on s. Rat he r, it li st s th ree te rm in at io n ev en ts

. Thi s su g g e s ts th e

pa rti es in te nd ed fo r th e ex pr es s te rm in at io n ev en ts to se rv e as th e ex cl us iv e m ean s of

co nt ract te rm in at io n. See W eb er v. Sen try In s., 44 2 N.W .2 d 16 4, 16 7 (Mi nn

. Ct

. App

. 19 89 ) (“ The well -rec og ni zed ru le o f ‘e x pr es si o un iu s es t ex cl us io al te riu s’

pr ov id es th at th e ex pr es si on of sp eci fic th in gs in a co nt ract im pl ie s th e ex cl us io n of

al l no t ex pr es se d.” ). The types of ev en ts ch os en to te rm in at e th e co nt ract bo ls te rs ou r

co nc lu si on

. The fir st te rm in at io n ev en t was a ve ry real po ss ib il it y at th e ti m e th e

pa rti es en te red in t o th e In ve st m en t Agr eem en t. Man y st art -u p co m pa ni es fai l

fin an ci al ly be fo re th ey ha ve a ch an ce to pr ov id e an y ki nd of ret ur n to in ve st or s. The

se co nd te rm in at io n ev en t cal ls fo r th e co nt ract to en d whe n no su rv iv or (s ) of th e

ag reem en t’s le ga l ho ld er can be fo un d. Thi s ev en t ap pe ars to co nt em pl at e th e
be ne fit s of th e ro y al ty pa y m en ts pa ss in g from on e ge ne rat io n to th e ne xt

. The th ird

te rm in at io n ev en t res em

bl es a res id ua l, cat ch al l m et ho d of te rm in at i n g th e co nt ract by writ te n ag reem en t be twee n th e pa rti es

. On th e su rfac e , t h i s cl au se se em s

m ean in gl es s; an y co nt ract can be te rm in at ed by la te r writ te n ag reem en t. Bu t i f th e

pa rti es in te nd ed fo r th is l i s t o f ev en ts to se rv e as th e ex cl us iv e m ean s of co nt ract

te rm in at io n, t he n t he in cl us io n o f a res id ua l cl au se m ak es pe rfec t s en se

.

Seco nd

, th e co nt ract as a who le ev in ces an in te nt fo r co nt in ue d per fo rm an ce.

Th e c o n t r a ct sp eci fic al ly st at es th at MPS C’s ob li ga ti on s co nt in ue “ as lo ng as th is

ag reem en t rem ai ns in effe ct .” At fir st gl an ce, th is ph ras e lo ok s to be pu re ta ut ol og y

. Bu t, when read to ge th er with th e th ree term in at io n e ve nt s, i t tak es on real m ean in g.

MPS C owe s th e rig ht s ho ld er “ as lo ng as ” on e of th e th ree te rm in at io n ev en ts ha s no t

oc cu rred an d MPS C st il l pr oc es se s m eat

. A se pa rat e cl au se in th e ag reem en t

di sa ll owi ng an y res tri ct io n on tra ns fer of fers fu rth er ev id en ce of in te nt fo r co nt in ue d

-5

-pe rfo rm an ce. The un de rlyin g pr em is e of th at cl au se is th e sa m e as th at of th e se co nd

te rm in at io n ev en t— an in t e n t fo r th e rig ht s to th e ro y al ty pa y m en ts to pa ss to th e

su cces so rs of t he rig ht s h ol de r.

Thi rd

, co nt in ue d pe rfo rm an ce fit s wit h th e pu rp os e of th e co nt ract as a who le

. See Mo to rs po rts Rac in g, 66 6 N.W .2d at 32 4. Thi s is an in ve st m en t ag reem en t. The

pu rp os e of th is ki nd of co nt ract is cl ear: an of fer of cas h fro m an an ge l in ve st or to ge t

a st art -u p of

f th e gr ou nd in ex ch an ge fo r a sl ic e of th e rewar ds sh ou ld t h e st art -u p

su ccee d. See Hol da hl v. Bi oe rg on om ic s, In c., No. A1 2- 14 95 , 20 13 W L 40 18 85 , at

*1 n.1 (Mi nn

. Ct

. App

. Feb

. 4, 20 13 ) (d is cu ss in g a n g e l i n v e s to rs ). A va rie ty of

fin an ci al arra ng e men t s can fu lfi ll th is pu rp os e. A co m m on fo rm of in ve st m en t

ag reem en t co ns is ts of t he st art -u p g ran ti ng th e an ge l in ve st or an eq ui ty s ta ke in th e

co m pa ny. See Dari an M. Ib rah im

, The (No t So ) Pu zzl in g Beh av io r of Ang el

In ve st or s , 6 1 V a n d

. L. Rev

. 14 05

, 14 22 (2 00 8)

. Here, we se e an al te rn at iv e

in ve st m en t agre em en t where th e st art -u p reta in s all of it s equ it y bu t in st ead of fers a

st ream of ro y al ty pa y m en ts ba se d on th e pr od uc t’s us e. If Jo hn Lam ou reu x ha d ta ke n

an eq ui ty st ak e in th e co m pa ny, MPS C su rel y c o ul d no t co m e ba ck so m e 25 y ears

la te r, aft er it ha d ach ie ve d g r e a t su cces s, an d eras e Lam ou reu x’s eq ui ty st ak e.

Lik ewis e, we se e no reas on to pr es um e th at a st ream of ro y al ty pa y m en ts

, pa id ou t as

pa rt of an in ve st m en t a g r e e men t, can be te rm in at ed ex cep t un de r th e te rm s of th at

ag reem en t.

Fo r th es e reas on s, we co nc lu de t h a t th e ex pr es s te rm s of th e In ve st m en t Agr eem en t co m

pe l MPS C’s co nt in ue d pe rfo rm an ce. MPS C can rel ie v e i t s e lf of

co nt in ue d pe rfo rm an ce on ly if so m e pr in ci pl e of Mi nn es o t a c o n tra ct la w ov erri de s

th e ex pr es s t erm s o f th e co nt ract

.

MPS C arg ue s th at Mi nn es ot a co nt ract la w req ui res us to su pp ly an at -wil l

te rm in at io n pr o v i s i o n to th e In ve st m en t Agr eem en t be cau se th e ag reem en t ha s no
de fin it e du rat io n. See Mi nn

. Deli Pro vi si on s, In c. v. Bo ar’s Head Pro vi si on s Co

., 60 6

-6

-F.3 d 54 4, 54 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ). MPS C rel ie s pr im ari ly on two Mi nn es ot a st at e cas es

to su p p or t it s arg um en t. In Hay es v. Nor th woo d Pan el bo ard Co

., a le tt er se nt by a pl y woo d m an uf

act ur er to a lo gg in g co m pa ny st at ed th at th e m an uf act ur er wou ld

pu rch as e woo d “ an nu al ly” fro m th e lo gg in g co m pa ny. 41 5 N.W .2d 68 7, 68 9 (Mi nn

. Ct

. App

. 19 87 ). W he n th e m an uf act ur er st op p e d pu rch as in g woo d, th e lo gg in g

co m pa ny fil ed su it bu t lo st at tri al

. I d

. O n a p p e a l

, th e co ur t he ld

, “ Bec au se [th e]

le tt er is in de fin it e as to it s du rat io na l te rm s, t h e t r i al co ur t pr op erl y ru le d th at an y

co nt ract ba se d on th e le tt er was in de fin it e as a m at te r of la w an d co ul d be te rm in at ed

at wil l.” Id

. at 69 1. In Ro se nb erg v. Heri ta ge Ren ov at io ns , LLC, a real -es ta te br ok er

co nt ract ed wit h a de ve lo pe r to se ll se ve ral hu nd red co nd om in iu m un it s. 68 5 N.W .2d

32 0, 32 2 (Mi nn

. 20 04 ). The de ve lo pe r te rm in at ed th e ag reem en t be fo re al l un it s were

so ld . Id. at 32 3. The br ok er sue d, bu t t he tri al co ur t h el d i n fa vo r of th e d ev el op er.
Id . at 32 3- 24

. On ap pe al , t he Mi nn es ot a Su pr em e Co ur t he ld , “ Bec au se th ere i s n o
de fin it e da te in th e co n t r a ct or ev en an ev en t fro m whi ch on e co ul d reas on ab ly

de te rm in e a de fin it e da te

, . . . th e di st ric t co ur t co ul d pr op erl y co nc lu de th at th e la ck

of a sp eci fic te rm in at io n da te ren de red th e [co nt ract ] te rm in ab le at wil l.” Id

. at 32 6.
Here, the In ve st m en t Agree m en t is term in ab le at wil l, MPSC co nt en ds

, be cau se th e

ag reem en t is an in de fin it e co nt ract —i t lack s eit he r an ex pr es se d or im pl ie d def in it e
du rat io n.

Bu t we di sa gr ee; M i n ne so ta la w m ak es cl ear th at a co nt ract is no t in de fin it e
whe n a pa rty’ s pe rfo rm an ce is co nd it io ne d on co nd uc t wit hi n th at pa rty’ s co nt ro l.

See Mi nn

. Deli

, 60 6 F.3 d at 54 9 (“ Mi nn es ot a la w do es no t, ho wev er, pe rm it un il at eral

te rm in at io n at wil l in cas es whe re th e co nt ract pr ov id es th at it wil l co nt in ue ‘so lo ng

as ’ on e pa rty pe rfo rm s sa ti sf act or il y .”); Ben so n Co -o p. Crea m ery Ass ’n v. Fi rs t Dis t.

Ass ’n, 15 1 N.W .2d 42 2, 42 7 (Mi nn

. 19 67 ) (h ol di ng th at if th e ob li go r’s pe rfo rm an ce

was co nd it io ne d on th e ob li ge e rem ai ni ng in th e ob li go r’s as so ci at io n , t h e n t he

ob li go r co ul d no t te rm in at e th e co nt ract at wil l); Leg red v. Sm eal Po rk Co

., No. C9

- 02 -6 19

, 20 02 WL 3 1 8 1 92 22

, at *2 (Mi nn

. Ct

. App

. Dec. 17

, 20 02 ) (h ol di ng th at a

co nt ract be twee n a po rk co m p a n y a nd it s m ark et er was no t of in de fin it e du rat io n

-7

-be cau se pe rfo rm an ce was cal le d fo r “ as lo ng as ” th e po rk co m pa ny ke pt a pa rti cu la r
br eed of ho g in it s he rd ). Here, MPS C m us t pa y ro y al ty fees “ as lo ng as ” it pr oc es se s

m eat (o r un t i l o n e o f t he te rm in at io n ev en ts oc cu rs ). The ch oi ce to pr oc es s m eat

, whi ch tri gg ers th e co nt ract ua l ob li ga ti on to pa y , res ts en ti rel y at MPS C’s di sc ret io n.
Thu s, un de r Mi nn es ot a la w, th e In ve st m en t Agr eem en t i s n o t in de fin it e; no at -wil l

te rm in at io n p ro vi si on ne ed be ad de d b y th e co ur ts

.

Eve n th e cas es ci te d by MPS C fai l to su pp or t it s co nt en ti on th at th is pa rti cu la r

a g r eem en t is te rm in ab le at wil l. The jury in Hay es de te rm in ed th at no c o n t r a c t

a c t u a ll y ex is te d be twee n th e pa rti es

. 41 5 N.W .2d at 68 9. So no du rat io na l

te rm —d efi ni te or in de fin it e—a ct ua ll y ex is te d in th at cas e. Ro se nb erg , on th e ot he r

ha nd

, in vo lv ed an em

pl oym en t ag reem en t. “ Und er Mi nn es ot a la w, an emplo y m en t

ag reem en t wit h no de fin it e ex pi rat io n da te is pr es um ed to be at wil l.” Ro se nb erg , 68 5

N.W .2d at 32 6

. Emp lo y

m en t co nt ract s im

pl ic at e th e la w’ s av ers io n to in vo lu nt ary

se rv it ud e. See 25 W il li st on on Co nt ract s § 67 :1 02 (4 th ed

. 2 0 0 2 ) ( d is cu ss in g th e jud ic ia ry ’s “ rep ug na n c e ” to in vo lu nt ary se rv it ud e in em pl oym en t co nt ract s)

. So it

m ak es se ns e fo r Mi nn es ot a co ur ts to de m an d a de fin it e ex pi rat io n da te i n an

em pl oym en t co nt ract

. Yet a co nc ern f o r i n v ol un ta ry se rv it ud e is no t pr es en t he re.

Afte r al l, t hi s i s an Inv es tm en t Ag reem en t, n ot an em pl oym en t co nt ract

.

MPS C’s la st arg um en t rel ie s on a de ci si on fro m th e Fi fth Ci rcu it su pp lying an

at -wil l te rm in at io n pr ov is io n t o a c on tra ct wit h sp eci fie d te rm in at io n ev en ts bu t no

te rm in at io n da te

. In Trie nt Part ne rs I Ltd

. v. Bl oc kb us te r Ent ert ai nme n t C o r p

. , a

li m it ed pa rtn e r s h i p ( Trie nt ) en te red in to a li cen si ng ag reem en t wit h Bl oc kb us te r to

own an d op erat e a nu m

be r of Bl oc kb us te r st or es in a gi ve n ge og rap hi c area

. 83 F.3 d

70 4, 70 6 (5 th Ci r. 19 96 ). The Lice ns e Agr eem en t st at ed t ha t it wou ld “ co nt in ue

in de fin it el y

. . . un ti l te rm in at ed in acco rd an ce wit h th e pr ov is io ns he reo f.” Id

. at 70 9.

The refe ren ced pro vi si on co nt ai ne d fo ur ter m in at io ns ev en ts :

-8

-(1 ) de fau lt s by ei th er p a r t y t h a t are no t or can no t be cu red wit hi n a

sp eci fie d nu m

be r of da y s; (2 ) th e de at h or in cap aci ty of a na tu ral pe rs on who is on e of Trie nt ’s p art ne rs , i f Bl o c k b u s t er do es no t co ns en t to th e
tra ns fer of the de ceas ed pa rtn er’s int eres t; (3 ) th e tra ns fer or chan ge of

co nt ro l of Trie nt ’s pa rtn ers hi p wit ho ut Bl oc kbus te r’ s pr ior ap pr ova l; an d (4 ) th e in so lv en cy

of e it he r pa rty.

Id

. Ana lyzin g th e ag reem en t, th e Fi fth Ci rcu it fo un d th at th e te rm in at io n ev en ts di d

“ no t l im it th e d ur at io n o f th e Lic en se Agre em en t o r m ak e it s d ur at io n d et erm in ab le

in an y real or co nc ret e way .” Id

. The ag reem en t was th eref or e te rm in ab le at wil l. Id

.

Unf or tu na te ly fo r MPS C, th e Fi fth Ci rcu it ’s de ci si on ex am in es a fact ua ll y
di st i n g u i s ha bl e co nt ract wit h in ap pl ic ab le le ga l an al y si s. The ag reem en t in Trie nt

st at es th at it wil l “ co nt in ue in de fin it el y ,” whe r e a s th e In ve st m en t Agr eem en t he re

m ak es no su ch st at em en t. Turn in g to th e le ga l an al y si s, t he Trien t co ur t an al y zed a

co nt r a ct un de r Tex as —n ot Mi nn es ot a—s ta te la w. Id

. at 70 8. And pr eced en t fro m

ou r own ci rcu it st an ds op po se d to Tr i e n t ’s p rin ci pa l ho ld in g. In So ut he rn W in e &
Sp iri ts of Nev ad a v. Mo un ta in Vall ey Sp rin g C o., we he ld a co nt ract ha d a de fin it e
du r at io n whe n th e co nt ract st at ed th at it wou ld te rm in at e up on th e oc cu rren ce of a

te rm in at io n ev en t, wit ho ut an y m en ti on of a du rat io na l te rm

. 64 6 F.3 d 52 6, 53 2 (8 th

Ci r. 20 11 ) (ap pl y in g Nev ad a la w).

III. Co nc lu si on

The cl ear in te nt of th e In ve st m en t Agr eem e n t is fo r MPS C’s co nt in ue d

pe rfo rm an ce as lo ng as it pr oc es se s m eat an d no ne of th e th ree te rm in at io n ev en ts

oc cu r. W e se e no pr in c i p l e o f M in ne so ta st at e la w or ge ne ral co nt ract la w th at

ov erri de s t he ag reem en t’s i nt en t. Thu s we a ffi rm th e d is tri ct co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-9

-