The parties' predecessors agreed to provide propane gas distribution systems to various subdivisions until natural gas mains were built out to them. Plaintiff was to determine if such a system was appropriate and to install and maintain it if so, and defendant was to supply the propane. Plaintiff could cancel the contract on the day of the year it was made with 30 days notice, if a system was to be converted to natural gas, but defendant was not permitted to cancel.
After a couple years, only 8 subdivisions were left being serviced by parties, and all were mobile home parks. Defendant experienced a shortage of propane, and so it voluntarily restricted all of its customers, including plaintiff, to only 80% of their requirements. After some conflict this was resolved, but defendant soon told plaintiff that it was raising its price. When plaintiff demanded an explanation as to why, defendant informed it that it was terminating the agreement because it lacked "mutuality."
District court held that the contract was void because defendant did not have a clause enabling cancellation like plaintiff had.