Heating & Air Specialists, Inc. v. Jones

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that supplier was justified in canceling contract with manufacturer due to manufacturer falling “seriously behind” on payments
• “[T]he jury necessarily found that an enforceable contract between the parties existed. This finding moots the issue of whether, in the absence of an enforceable contract, Lennox may have been liable to A/C under a theory of promissory estoppel.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).