Hoerstman General Contracting, Inc v. Hahn

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that accord and satisfaction existed, in part, because defendants wrote ‘final payment’ in capital letters
• holding that when the legislature intends abrogate the common law, it “should speak in no uncertain terms”
• stating that enumeration of exceptions or conditions \eliminates the possibility of [there] being other exceptions under the legal maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius \
• noting that under the maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius, the express reference of one thing in a statutory provision implies the exclusion of other similar things
• stating the interpretative rule expressio unius est exclusio alterius, i.e., \the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another\
• stating the interpretative rule expressio unius est exclusio alterius, i.e., “the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).