Maere v. Churchill

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that mental anguish damages were not recoverable under either a contract or negligence theory because plaintiffs complaint did not allege that defendants’ breach of contract was intentional, reckless or wanton
• holding that mental anguish damages were not recoverable under either a contract or negligence theory because plaintiff's complaint did not allege that defendants' breach of contract was intentional, reckless or wanton
• affirming summary judgment where the claimed damages “were the result of [plaintiffs’] own inaction” rather than “attributable to the defendants”
• attorneys sued for breach of contract and negligence in rendering legal services could not be sued for emotional distress and mental anguish
• claim was properly dismissed on summary judgment where plaintiffs “failed to establish damages attributable to defendants” because the damages had been caused by plaintiffs’ own inaction
• as all the plaintiffs’ damages were caused by their own inaction and could have been avoided, those damages were not recoverable, and the plaintiffs were “barred” from seeking those damages from the defendants

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).