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

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).