Ek v. Herrington

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting plaintiff’s mutual mistake argument where plaintiffs mistaken belief was the result of its failure to investigate
• mutual mistake “is mutual, substantial, material and exists at the time the contract is entered”
• mutual mistake “is mutual, substantial, material and exists at the time the contract is entered”
• mutual mistake “is mutual, substantial, material and exists at the time the contract is entered”
• mutual mistake “is mutual, substantial, material and exists at the time the contract is entered”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).