Fox v. Mountain West Electric, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding the U.C.C. did not apply because the “predominant factors” of the mixed contract were installing, designing, and engineering the fire alarm system, while the specialty goods were “incidental” and “comprised one-half” of the total contract price
• affirming attorney fees under 12-120(3) on an implied-in-fact contract claim
• affirming attorney fees under 12-120(3) on an implied-in-fact contract claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).