· 9/11/2012
Innotext Incorporated v. Petra'Lex USA Incorporated
Citations
- 694 F.3d 581
- 2012 WL 3932044
- 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 19026
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[A]n 11 ‘implied in law’ claim differs from an ‘implied in fact’ contract. An implied-in-fact 12 contract still requires mutual assent to the essential terms of the contract, but is 13 evidenced by the parties’ course of dealing.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Batchelder, McKEAGUE, Quist
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.