Armstrong v. Rohm and Haas Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a “promise to give plaintiffs ‘all the work they could handle’ is too vague and indefinite to be enforced as a contract.”
• explaining that “the law will refuse to enforce a simple and direct promise if it is unduly vague”
• allowing 12(b)(6) motion where \the alleged oral contract here is too imprecise to be enforceable as a matter of law.\
• allowing 12(b)(6) motion where “the alleged oral contract here is too imprecise to be enforceable as a matter of law.”
• \Whether an alleged contract is legally enforceable in light of indefinite terms is a question of law for the court.\
• \Whether an alleged contract is legally enforceable in light of indefinite terms is a question of law for the court.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).