Gurley v. King

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that with regard to a “preliminary” oral contract, summary judgment was inappropriate because reasonable minds could differ as to'whether a contract had been created
• noting that the absence of essential terms would support the trial court’s dismissal of the breach of contract action
• reversing the trial court’s grant of summary judgment on the merits rather than the trial court’s sua sponte decision to revisit its previous denial of summary judgment
• stating “where one party has acted in reliance on an indefinite agreement the courts will act to protect that reliance whether through a contractual or non-contractual remedy.”
• “Under some circumstances, a binding a contract may be formed if the parties agree on the material terms, even though they leave open other provisions for later negotiation.”
• “[I]t is important that courts enforce and preserve agreements that were intended as binding”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).