Hawaii Supreme Court· 9/30/1975

Earl M. Jorgensen Co. v. Mark Construction, Inc.

Citations

540 P.2d 978
56 Haw. 466
17 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 1126
1975 Haw. LEXIS 121

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that plain error review was warranted where, as to the third factor, the issue on appeal was one of first impression and called for the interpretation and elucidation of a statute
recognizing plain error based upon, inter alia, the observation that \[t]he consideration of this issue raised for the first time on appeal will not affect the integrity of any findings of fact of the trial court\
recognizing plain error based upon the observation that “[t]he consideration of this issue raised for the first time on appeal will not affect the integrity of any findings of fact of the trial court”
finding genuine issue of material fact as to whether refund remedy had failed where defects in steel plate were not detectable until buyer attempted to install plate
where quotation contained terms of description, price, payment and time and place of delivery, and subsequent purchase order essentially mirrored those terms, quotation constituted offer
steel supplier’s signed bid sheet upon which contractor based its own bid for highway contract deemed an offer

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Richardson, Kobayashi, Ogata, Menor, Fong

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

90 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.