J. A. Jones Construction Co. v. Englert Engineering Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he overriding consideration ... is ... that the successful interposition of [illegality] defenses is too likely to enrich parties who reap the benefits of a contract and then seek to avoid the corresponding burdens.”
• sustaining district judge's \refusal to consider (defendant's) proffered antitrust defense\
• sustaining district judge’s “refusal to consider [defendant’s] proffered antitrust defense”
• court notes that as a general rule a defendant in breach of contract action cannot assert an antitrust defense where the contract was an “intelligible economic transaction in itself’ and not “part of ... any general plan or scheme that the law condemned”
• agreement enforced despite lack of delivery
• agreement enforced despite lack of delivery

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).