Barry v. NJ STATE HWY. AUTHORITY

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that, with nothing more, “every breach of a contract” could constitute an NJCFA claim, because “all contracts include a promise of performance, either express or implied.”
• explaining that “reasonable limits must be placed upon the operation of the Act in order that its enforcement will properly reflect legislative intent” and that the New Jersey Legislature did not intend for the NJCFA to apply to every breach of contract claim
• explaining that “reasonable limits must be placed upon the operation of the Act in order that its enforcement will properly reflect legislative intent” and that the New Jersey Legislature did not intend for the NJCFA to apply to every breach of contract claim
• “A failure to fulfill a promise may constitute a breach of contract, but it is not fraud and the nonperformance of that promise does not make it so.”
• “A failure to fulfill a promise may constitute a breach of contract, but it is not fraud and the non-performance of that promise does not make it so.”
• “A failure to fulfill a promise may constitute a breach of contract, but it is not fraud and the nonperformance of that promise does not make it so.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).