Cablevision of Breckenridge, Inc. v. Tannhauser Condominium Association
Supreme Court of Colorado
649 P.2d 1093(1982)
- Written by Joseph Bowman, JD
Facts
Cablevision of Breckenridge, Inc. (Cablevision) (plaintiff) contracted with a representative of Tannhauser Condominium Association (Tannhauser) (defendant) to provide television and radio service to Tannhauser’s 33-unit building. Cablevision installed the equipment and provided service for over two years. Cablevision then stopped billing on all but three units at the request of a Tannhauser representative. Tannhauser installed its own equipment and provided service to the remaining 30 units and a new 25-unit building without paying Cablevision. When Cablevision found out, it cut off service. Cablevision sued for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and other claims. Before trial, the parties stipulated to the facts and submitted a single question to the court: whether Tannhauser violated any contract, whether implied or in fact, with Cablevision. The court held Tannhauser had breached and entered damages in the stipulated amount of $12,195. Tannhauser objected to the amount, and a hearing was held on damages. The court awarded $11,597.50 in actual damages. Tannhauser appealed. The court of appeals reversed, finding (1) the only question before the court was whether Tannhauser breached a contract and (2) the stipulation did not establish breach. The Supreme Court of Colorado granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lohr, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
