Search results
The court concluded that "The defendants unjustifiably breached these contracts; the plaintiff did not breach these contracts." FN 7. The trial court was not compelled to specify the exact time for performance because it concluded that defendants had breached the contracts by anticipatory repudiation, i.e., a breach which occurs prior to the ...
This case involves a land sale agreement with a liquidated damages clause which, upon the buyers' breach of contract, limited the [29 Cal. 3d 348] seller's remedy to possession of any plans or reports prepared at the buyers' request and expense. The court must decide: (1) whether the buyers' promise was illusory and, therefore, failed to bind the parties to the legal obligations of a valid ...
Whatever the merits of the California Supreme Court's decision to adopt the Second Restatement's standard for unilateral mistake gener-ally,33 the court missed a chance to articulate a superior rule for the subclass of unilateral mistake cases involving "clerical errors": that whenever a contracting party can prove it made a good-faith, clerical
The three factors set forth in rule 29.5(a) are met here. The Ninth Circuit has requested that we answer the question it posed; our answer to the [23 Cal. 4th 7] question will determine the matter before that court. No California case has considered whether or how an employer can modify or cancel a unilaterally implemented employment policy.
The court reasoned that a breach of contract invades a single primary right, and the plaintiff could not split its breach of contract cause of action into multiple claims. This reasoning was erroneous because joint and several liability does not implicate the “primary rights” doctrine.1 Moreover, the facts here do not support preclusion ...
- 202KB
- 18
Getting Help. For immediate help with your business legal needs, call us today at 714-505-3000 for more information on Southern California’s business and corporate law firm. Beware of the Illegal Contract. Be careful in drafting and entering into agreements as the illegality defense is broadly applied and the consequences can be very severe.
People also ask
Can a breach of contract cause of action be split into multiple claims?
Which cases predate the judicial interpretation of contracts?
Can a trial court sever an unconscionable agreement?
How does California law treat a valid arbitration agreement?
What is unconscionable in Ramirez v Charter Communications?
Can a party enforce a contract based on illegality?
Jul 15, 2024 · established. A contract is unconscionable if one of the parties lacked a meaningful choice in deciding whether to agree and the contract contains terms that are unreasonably favorable to the other party.” (Kho, supra, 8 Cal.5th at p. 125; see also Baltazar v. Forever 21, Inc. (2016) 62 Cal.4th 1237, 1243 (Baltazar).)
