Palmer v. McMurry

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a “faulty workmanship” clause’s concluding provisos — viz., references to other sections, use of the limiting term “in this section” — made the clause ambiguous
• holding that similar contract language was a “resulting-loss provision”
• Efficient proximate cause theory applies where there are “two separate or distinct perils which 5 could each, under some circumstances, have occurred independently of the other and caused 6 damage.”
• “ ‘For the efficient proximate cause theory to apply,… there must be two separate or 7 distinct perils which could each, under some circumstances, have occurred independently of the 8 other and caused damage.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).