Forget your password? Don't worry.
×Academy Chicago Publishers v. Cheever
Supreme Court of Illinois | 578 N.E.2d 981 (1991)
An agreement between parties that lacks definiteness and certainty in its material terms is not a valid and enforceable contract, unless the conduct of the parties shows mutual assent to and a common understanding of the material terms and a trial court can reasonably enforce the terms of the agreement as written.
Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. v. Murphy
Supreme Court of Connecticut | 538 A.2d 219 (1988)
An insured person, who delays reporting an insured incident in violation of notice provisions in his insurance contract, does not automatically forfeit his right to insurance coverage as long as he provides sufficient factual evidence to rebut the presumption that his delay prejudiced the insurance carrier.
Aiello Const., Inc. v. Nationwide Tractor Trailer Training and Placement Corp.
Supreme Court of Rhode Island | 413 A.2d 85 (1980)
In a breach by a person who has contracted to have services performed, damages paid to the services provider may include actual expenditures plus profits that would have been realized from full performance.
Akers v. J.B. Sedberry, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Tennessee | 286 S.W.2d 617 (1955)
An offer is rejected when the offeror is justified in inferring from the words or conduct of the offeree that the offeree intends not to accept the offer or to take it under further advisement.
Alamance County Board of Education v. Bobby Murray Chevrolet, Inc.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina | 465 S.E.2d 306 (1996)
A commercial seller who contracts with a buyer to provide goods manufactured by a third party is not excused from performance of the initial contract by the third party's breach unless the third party is specified or implied as the exclusive source of supply in the contract, the contract contains a clause specifically conditioning the seller's performance on its ability to obtain goods from the third party, the third party breach is due to a reasonably unforeseeable contingency beyond the seller's control, or performance is blocked by intervening government regulations and the seller explicitly did not assume the risk of such regulations.
Albre Marble & Tile Co. v. John Bowen Co.
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts | 155 N.E.2d 437 (1959)
A party may recover for payments made or obligations reasonably incurred in preparation for performance of the contract.
Angel v. Murray
Supreme Court of Rhode Island | 322 A.2d 630 (1974)
When unexpected or unanticipated difficulties arise during the course of performance of a contract, the parties may modify the initial contract even without additional consideration for the modification as long as (1) the parties voluntarily agree and the promise modifying the initial contract is made before the contract is fully performed on either side; (2) the underlying circumstances prompting the modification are unanticipated by the parties; and (3) the modification is fair and equitable.
Ardente v. Horan
Supreme Court of Rhode Island | 366 A.2d 162 (1976)
A valid acceptance that is capable of forming a valid contract must be definite and unequivocal and must not impose additional conditions or limitations on the offer, unless such conditional language is clearly independent of the actual acceptance.
Austin Instrument, Inc. v. Loral Corp.
Court of Appeals of New York | 272 N.E.2d 533 (1971)
A contract is voidable on the ground of economic duress when it is established that the party making the claim was forced to agree to it by means of a wrongful threat precluding the exercise of his free will.
Austin Instruments v. Loral Corp.
Supreme Court of New York | 316 N.Y.S.2d 528 (1970)
A contract is void for economic duress occurs where a party is the victim of a wrongful or unlawful act or threat that deprives the victim of his free will.
Bastian v. Gafford
Supreme Court of Idaho | 563 P.2d 48 (1977)
A contract implied in fact exists when one party requests and receives goods or services from another party under circumstances which imply an agreement to pay for those goods or services, regardless of the presence of unjust enrichment or whether the goods or services are ever actually used.
Batsakis v. Demotsis
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas | 226 S.W.2d 673 (1949)
Although a valid contract requires all parties to provide consideration, mere inadequacy of consideration will not void a contract.
Best v. United States National Bank
Supreme Court of Oregon | 739 P.2d 554 (1987)
If a party is given discretion in performance of an aspect of the contract, he performs in bad faith when exercising that discretion for purposes not contemplated by the parties.
Bishop v. Eaton
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts | 37 N.E. 665 (1894)
Deposit of a letter of acceptance in the mail is sufficient to constitute acceptance of an offer.
Bloor v. Falstaff Brewing Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit | 601 F.2d 609 (1979)
Where a term in a contract measures the quantity by the output of the seller or the requirements of the buyer the actual output is measured by good faith.
Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.
Court of Appeal | [1893] 1 Q.B. 256
A general advertisement of an award constitutes an offer that is capable of being accepted and binding the offeror in a valid contract, provided at least contemporaneous notice and some consideration are present.
Channel Home Centers v. Grossman
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit | 795 F.2d 291 (3d Cir. 1986)
A letter of intent constitutes an enforceable agreement if both parties manifested the intent to be bound to the letter, there was consideration on both sides of the promise, and the terms are sufficiently definite to be specifically enforced.
Chateau des Charmes Wines, Ltd. v. Sabat
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 328 F.3d 528 (2003)
Forum selection clauses in shipping invoices between international parties are invalid and unenforceable when a prior oral contract between the parties did not include such clauses.
Clapp v. Orix Credit Alliance, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Oregon | 84 P.3d 833 (2004)
A prohibition of assignment of a contract is construed as barring only the delegation of the assignor's performance, not the assignment of her rights under the contract.
Clark v. West
Court of Appeals of New York | 86 N.E. 1 (1908)
A "waiver" is the voluntary and intentional relinquishment of a known right, and implies an election to dispense with something of value or forego some advantage which the party waiving it might at its option have demanded or insisted upon.
