Brookside Farm v. Mama Rizzo United States District Court 1995 1) Facts a) Brookside farms and MRI entered into a requirements contract for sale of basil leaves b) MRI agreed to buy 91,000 pounds of basil leaves for a one year term c) Price was seasonally based and for low season was 3.80 and high season was 5 per pound d) MRI requested that Brookside remove the stems and Brookside agreed for an extra .50 a pound e) The contract contained a term that no oral modifications could be made so Brookside agreed to pencil it into the contract f) MRI discounted their leaves for a couple months and then when resumed Brookside had to charge them more g) MRI paid the higher prices until in march when the check from MRI bounced h) Brookside brought claim to collect the money 2) History a) MRI claims plaintiffs violated contract clause of modification by raising the price of the leaves b) Brookside claimed that defendant breached contract and is liable for 3,041 pounds of basil leaves 3) Issues a) Was the price modification binding? i) The modification was binding by the performance of the parties until March. MRI paid for the higher price without dispute thus indicating it was not an issue until march when the check bounced and they had already received and kept the basil leaves b) Does the contract pass the statute of Frauds i) The contract does fall within the statute of frauds. The modification also falls within the statute of frauds because one party relied upon the modification to the deal.