Erhardt v. Duff

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the insurer's conditioning its tender of policy limits on the injured party's executing releases was an acceptance, not a counteroffer, because releases were implicit in the agreement
• holding that the insurer's conditioning its tender of policy limits on the injured party's executing releases was an acceptance, not a counteroffer, because releases were implicit in the agreement
• holding that “the execution of the release was implicit as part of the tender, and not an additional element of the agreement”
• holding that “the execution of the release was implicit as part of the tender, and not an additional element of the agreement”
• holding that a letter agreeing to meet the demands in a settlement offer constitutes an acceptance
• holding that execution of releases is an implicit condition of settlement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).