prod.liab.rep. (Cch) P 14,855 Outboard Marine Corporation v. Babcock Industries, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting in warranty case under Illinois law that “there is no contract doctrine of contributory or comparative negligence”
• noting in warranty case under Illinois law that “there is no contract doctrine of contributory or comparative negligence”
• explaining that promisee’s failure to exercise general duty of care may be relevant for computing damages because “[t]he promisor who breaks his promise is liable only for the harm that he causes, which is to say the harm that would have been avoided had he not broken his promise”
• explaining that promisee’s failure to exercise general duty of care may be relevant for computing damages because “[t]he promisor who breaks his promise is liable only for the harm that he causes, which is to say the harm that would have been avoided had he not broken his promise”
• “[I]t does not follow from the absence of a general duty of care on the part of contract promises that a promisee’s fault is irrelevant in computing damages.”
• \[I]t does not follow from the absence of a general duty of care on the part of contract promises that a promisee's fault is irrelevant in computing damages.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).