Oelschlegel v. Mutual Real Estate Investment Trust

How courts have described this case

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

• remanding for recalculation of damages, notwithstanding filing of motion for new trial for damages, because court erred as a matter of law in its calculation of damages
• ”[e]ven if this notice were technically deficient, as appellant argues, we may overlook procedural errors where there was no bad faith, where there was substantial compliance with the rule’s requirements, and where there was no prejudice or surprise.”
• “The central principal of the law regarding contractual damages is that the non-breaching party should be placed in the position he or she would have been in absent the breach.”
• “The central principal of the law regarding contractual damages is that the non-breaching party should be placed in the position he or she would have been in absent the breach.”
• “The central principal of the law regarding contractual damages is that the non-breaching party should be placed in the position he or she would have been in absent the breach.”
• “The central principal of the law regarding contractual damages is that the non-breaching party should be placed in the position he or she would have been in absent the breach.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).