Davidson v. Hensen

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 contract between a homeowner and an unlicensed contractor is not void ab initio and that it “has limited enforceability”
• observing that \[t]he shorthand description for this policy of finality is that judicial review of an arbitration award is limited to the face of the award\
• noting that “[w]here there is no majority agreement as to the rationale for a decision, the holding of the court is the position taken by those concurring on the narrowest grounds”
• observing that “[t]he shorthand description for this policy of finality is that judicial review of an arbitration award is limited to the face of the award”
• noting “a distinction between illegal contracts which are void ab initio (i.e., those which are criminal or against public morals/policy, such as wagering contracts
• failing to comply with licensing registration statute does not make contract void ab initio; “very applicability of the substantial compliance doctrine to such circumstances argues that a contract subject to the statute is not void”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).