Appellate Court of Illinois· 3/7/1980

Farwell Construction Co. v. Ticktin

Citations

405 N.E.2d 1051
84 Ill. App. 3d 791
39 Ill. Dec. 916
1980 Ill. App. LEXIS 2973

How courts have described this case

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

significant differences in the amount sought versus the amount awarded indicate that the amount was not easily ascertainable
real estate sales contract qualiﬁes as “instrument of writing” under statute, so interest may be awarded if damages could be determined with suﬃcient pre- cision
denial of interest was not abuse of discretion where “contract price was sharply disputed” and market value “was also disputable”
denial of interest was not abuse of discretion where “contract price was sharply disputed” and market value “was also disputable”
real estate sales contract qualiﬁes as “instrument of writing” under statute, so interest may be awarded if damages could be determined with suﬃcient pre- cision
contra proferentem is a “last resort” rule of contract construction employed only where the court cannot ascertain the meaning of contract provisions under any other interpretive approach

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sullivan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

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

Other cases named Farwell Construction Co. v. Ticktin

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Farwell Construction Co. v. Ticktin
Appellate Court of Illinois· 1978-04-14· cited 34×

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.