James D. Swoish, Inc. v. Panda Foods, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the statute of frauds does not apply where the promisor’s “primary object in guaranteeing the [debtor’s] payment was to secure direct and personal benefits to himself’ from the promisee’s acts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).