Grohman v. Kahlig

How courts have described this case

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

• deciding that “[t]he trial court committed harmless error by submitting the question to the jury because the jury answered it as the trial court should have”
• holding erroneous submission of question of law in jury charge harmless if answer may be deemed immaterial and could have been disregarded by the trial court
• stating that courts must examine and consider entire writing in order to harmonize and give effect to all contract provisions so that none will be rendered meaningless
• stating that “[w]hether a party has breached a contract is a question of law for the court, not a question of fact for the jury, when the facts of the parties’ conduct are undisputed or conclusively established.”
• affirming dismissal of fraud claim based on defendant’s misrepresentation that he would refrain from converting his business types where the agreement did not prohibit such conversion
• holding as a matter of law that the conversion of two corporations, whose stock was pledged as collateral to secure a note, into two limited partnerships, did not violate a security agreement prohibiting the transfer of any collateral or any interest in the collateral

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).