Pride v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding it was not violative of public policy for telephone company to legally limit its liability by contract for negligence in the publication of a paid advertisement in the yellow pages of its telephone directory
• directory publisher was free to contract privately and refuse ad that violated its standards
• “[0]ur decisions recognize the general principle that considerations of public policy prohibit a party from protecting himself by contract against liability for negligence ... when the parties are not on roughly equal bargaining terms.”
• “[A] contractual provision seeking to relieve a party to a contract from liability for his own negligence may or may not be enforceable, depending upon whether it is violative of public policy.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).