People of Michigan v. Carlos Alberto Soler-Norona

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting a similar argument where termination was not effective immediately but “[t]he letter unequivocally purported to terminate the agreement, not to give a notice of default”
• requiring strict compliance with notice-and-cure provision but holding that breaching party may still defend on basis that product contamination that caused it to refuse further performance could not be cured
• “[T]he general rule is that a party who has substantially performed may maintain an action 6 on a contract[.]”
• “Only a breach or nonperformance of a promise by one party to a bilateral contract so material as to justify a refusal of the other party to perform a contractual duty, discharges that duty.”
• “[I]f it is determined that a breach is material, or goes to the root or essence of the contract, it follows that substantial performance has not been rendered, and further performance by the other party is excused.”
• material breach “‘goes to the root or essence of the contract’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).