Aesthetic Property Maintenance, Inc. v. Capitol Indemnity Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that substan tial compliance may be adequate when it does not defeat the statute’s general policy or purpose
• following Koehler and concluding that substantial compliance can be adequate under section 32-1153 to satisfy the policy of the statute
• acknowledging § 32-1153 designed to protect public and rejecting contractor’s claim that statute should be strictly construed against subcontractor whose license had lapsed
• whether rule of strict or substantial compliance with statute applies is question of legislative intent
• “Did the contractor knowingly ignore the registration requirements? If so, this is fatal to a claim of substantial compliance.”
• substantial compliance inquiry includes whether failure to comply prejudiced party that statute seeks to protect

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).