Opinion ID: 690481
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Tigg instruction

Text: 28 Mylan claims that the district court erred in denying its proposed jury instruction with regard to its breach of contract claim. The proposed instruction was based on the Third Circuit's holding in Tigg Corp. v. Dow Corning Corp., 962 F.2d 1119, 1125 (3d Cir.1992), that a best efforts clause forces the buyer/reseller to consider the best interests of the seller and itself as if they were one firm. Mylan requested the court to instruct the jury that the best efforts clause required Cyanamid to act in Mylan's best interests rather than its own. Tigg, however, involved an implied best efforts provision. The agreement between Mylan and Cyanamid contains an express best efforts provision which explicitly limits Cyanamid's duty to efforts consistent with its overall business objectives. In other words, the agreement allows Cyanamid to act in accordance with its own objectives if they conflict with those of Mylan. Therefore, the district court properly denied Mylan's proposed instruction.