Sharp, J. | May 27, 2026
In a suit on two contracts concerning a crude-oil terminal and pipeline, respectively, the court holds on cross-motions for summary judgment that the contracts are unambiguous and can be construed without resorting to extrinsic evidence. Analyzing the terminal contract’s storage requirement in the context of the entire agreement, the court concludes the terminal must allocate two tanks exclusively for the plaintiff’s use. The court holds the pipeline-transportation contract’s “ship or pay” clause allows the plaintiff to include all crude oil—including shipments paid with credits earned from past billing periods—to reduce the deficiency payments owed when it fails to meet its crude-oil commitment. However, plaintiff’s claim for miscalculated deficiency-payment billing as to the earliest disputed invoices is barred for failure to deliver timely written notice, which is a condition precedent to bringing suit that the court enforces according to the contract’s plain terms.