Johnson v. McQuade

How courts have described this case

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

• reversing trial court’s summary judgment ruling that lost profits sought by plaintiff were consequential damages subject to the contract’s damages limitation provision
• explaining lost profits may be direct if natu rally flowing from the contract or from an existing resale contract or may be consequential if stemming from anticipated collateral agreements
• permitting plaintiff to plead lost profits damages upon a finding that the “distinction at the heart of these cases is [that] the lost profits flowed directly from the contract itself”
• “[D]amages must be evaluated within the context of the agreement, and ... under the parties’-.[agreement], the lost .profits constitute general, not consequential, damages.”
• “[W]here . . . 23 damages reflect a ‘loss of profits on collateral business arrangements,’ they are [consequential damages].”
• “General damages are the natural and probable consequence of the breach of a contract. They include money that the breaching party agreed to pay under the contract.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).