Colorado Environments, Inc. v. Valley Grading Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that plaintiffs were not entitled to 18 recover an award of both lost profits and equipment standby damages because that would have 19 placed the plaintiff in a better position than if the defendant had performed
• striking an award for equipment standby damages in a contract action by the amount that it exceeded the plaintiff’s actual lost profits and costs
• noting that receiving lost profits and unavoidable costs placed the plaintiff in the position it would have been had the contract been performed, but “[a]n award of equipment standby damages . . . would permit a double recovery and give [plaintiff] a windfall”
• endorsing jury instruction that “[u]nder Nevada law, one who contracts to render a performance for which government approval is required has the duty of obtaining such approval”
• adopting the test espoused in Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 347 (1979)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).