Nebraska Nutrients, Inc. v. Shepherd

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that indefinite agreement to fund joint venture became enforceable after one party to the contract agreed to pay for “the rest of the construction” and then advanced funds for over two years, while other parties fulfilled all their duties under the contract
• observing that contracting parties can “cure” an indefinite contract “by later verbal clarification”
• applying Arizona law to proceedings because of choice of law provision in the agreement, but refusing to submit claim for punitive damages under Arizona law, because against Nebraska public policy
• conducting de novo review of whether parties had a binding contract
• conducting de novo review of whether parties had a binding contract
• abrogated in part on other grounds as stated in Sutton v. Killham, 285 Neb. 1, 825 N.W.2d 188 (2013)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).