Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Ocor Products Corp. v. Walt Disney Productions, Inc. Case Brief

District Court, D. New Hampshire1988Docket #1150879
682 F. Supp. 90 6 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 675 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2619 1988 WL 26581 Contracts Agency Commercial Law

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: A seller’s acknowledgment form included an anti-copying clause. The buyer’s assistant signed it. The court found a factual dispute over the assistant’s authority to “expressly agree” to this new, material term under UCC § 2-207, denying summary judgment for both parties.

Legal Significance: This case illustrates that under UCC § 2-207, signing a confirmation form can constitute “express agreement” to a material alteration, but only if the signing agent possessed actual or apparent authority to bind their principal to such new terms.

Ocor Products Corp. v. Walt Disney Productions, Inc. Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Ocor Products Corp. (“Ocor”) sold specialty bags to Walt Disney Productions, Inc. (“Disney”). In 1983, Disney issued a purchase order for more bags. Ocor responded with an acknowledgment form that, on its reverse side, included “Provision K,” which prohibited the customer from reproducing or remitting Ocor’s designs to third parties. Danelle Hickman, an assistant buyer at Disney, signed and returned Ocor’s form, which stated above the signature line that the buyer agreed to the conditions on the back. Prior to this exchange, Disney had already sent a sample of Ocor’s bag to a subsidiary to find a cheaper foreign manufacturer. After Hickman signed the form, Disney continued to work with the foreign manufacturer to develop a copy, which it later purchased. Ocor sued for breach of contract, alleging Disney violated Provision K. Disney argued it was not bound by the provision because its purchase order did not contain the term and Hickman lacked authority to agree to a material alteration of the contract.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Under UCC § 2-207, does an agent’s signature on a seller’s confirmation form containing a material alteration constitute express agreement binding the principal, when there is a factual dispute over the agent’s actual or apparent authority to assent to new terms?

No. The court denied both parties’ motions for summary judgment because a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate vel

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Under UCC § 2-207, does an agent’s signature on a seller’s confirmation form containing a material alteration constitute express agreement binding the principal, when there is a factual dispute over the agent’s actual or apparent authority to assent to new terms?

Conclusion

The case establishes that in a UCC § 2-207 "battle of the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commo

Legal Rule

Under UCC § 2-207, a new term in an acceptance that materially Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehe

Legal Analysis

The court analyzed the dispute as a classic "battle of the forms" Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • In a UCC § 2-207 “battle of the forms,” signing an
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim i

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

A 'reasonable person' is a legal fiction I'm pretty sure I've never met.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+