Folgers Architects Ltd. v. Kerns

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that during pendency of appeal, both parties filed motions relating to supersedeas deposits made by appellant
• stating that during pendency of appeal, both parties filed motions relating to supersedeas deposits made by appellant
• citing, with approval, cases holding that anti-assignment provisions prohibiting assignment of a contract do not affect the assignability of a claim for breach of contract
• this court upon granting further review may consider assignments of error Court of Appeals did not reach
• “When an unambiguous contract exists that covers the issue for which damages are sought, promissory estoppel is not a viable theory of recovery.”
• “[T]he intent of the provision against assignment of rights under a contract, which generally is to allow the parties to choose with whom they contract, is not affected by allowing an assignment of a right to collect damages for breach of contract.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).