Native Alaskan Reclamation & Pest Control, Inc. v. United Bank Alaska

How courts have described this case

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

• holding wrongdoer’s willful conduct could justify requiring less stringency in assessing plaintiff’s proof
• inability of corporation to obtain replacement financing and resulting loss of project were basis for recovering special damages if foreseeable at time of contracting
• “Damages are not recoverable for loss beyond an amount that the evidence permits to be established with reasonable certainty.” (quoting Restatement (Second) of Conts. § 352 (Am. L. Inst. 1981))
• “We, therefore, conclude that [the cross-appellant] has failed to demonstrate that the trial court’s findings on this issue were clearly erroneous and affirm the trial court’s findings with regard to causation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).