BRC Rubber and Plastics, Inc., had a contract with Continental Carbon Co., in which Continental would sell carbon black to the buyer. Carbon black is used principally in the manufacture of rubber products.

At one point in the parties’ five-year contract, supplies of carbon black became tight. Continental tried to use such market shortages to impose an increase in the baseline price to BRC. BRC became worried that Continental would no longer be able to supply the necessary quantities of carbon black. Continental stopped shipping carbon black to BRC because the latter had not agreed to a price increase. BRC began looking for alternate suppliers. BRC asked Continental for “adequate assurance” that Continental would continue to supply carbon black under the existing fiveyear contract. Continental finally stated that it could ship the necessary quantities of carbon black under the five-year contract, but the dates would not be the same and BRC would have to accept the higher price demanded. If BRC did not believe that Continental was providing adequate assurance for future deliveries of carbon black, could it use the doctrine of anticipatory repudiation?