Mishara Construction Co. v. Transit-Mixed Concrete Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that it was a question for the jury whether labor difficulties and picket lines at the construction site rendered performance by the defendant, a concrete supplier, “commercially impracticable”
• \The question is . . . [w]as the contingency which developed one which the parties could reasonably be thought to have foreseen as a real possibility which could affect performance?\
• “The question is . . . [w]as the contingency which developed one which the parties could reasonably be thought to have foreseen as a real possibility which could affect performance?”
• when quantity is measured in terms of requirements, it means “the actual good faith” requirements of the buyer
• Where “no time for performance is set out in the contract, . . . the court by long established rule will imply a reasonable time”
• inferring reasonable time for performance absent specific agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).