Arc Electrical Construction Co. v. George A. Fuller Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• applying the prevention doctrine where “the [defendant’s] own act, in terminating the contract . . . rendered it impossible for [plaintiff] to take any necessary steps to satisfy [performance]
• applying the prevention doctrine where “the [defendant’s] own act, in terminating the contract . . . rendered it impossible for [plaintiff] to take any necessary steps to satisfy [performance]
• applying the prevention doctrine where “the [defendant’s] own act, in terminating the contract . . . rendered it impossible for [plaintiff] to take any necessary steps to satisfy [performance]
• applying the prevention doctrine where “the [defendant’s] own act, in terminating the contract . . . rendered it impossible for [plaintiff] to take any necessary steps to satisfy [performance]
• applying the prevention doctrine where “the [defendant’s] own act, in terminating the contract . . . rendered it impossible for [plaintiff] to take any necessary steps to satisfy [performance]
• “[D]efendant cannot rely on [a] condition precedent ... where the non-performance of the condition was caused or consented to by itself.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).