Quinn v. Dondlinger & Sons Construction Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• A person cannot \reasonably [rely] upon ... allegedly fraudulent statements made in the face of plainly contradictory contractual language.\
• agreement found to violate § 8(e) in NLRB v. National Maritime Union, supra, might be nonexempt and might violate antitrust law
• A person cannot “reasonably [rely] upon ... allegedly fraudulent statements made in the face of plainly contradictory contractual language.”
• labor exemption issue not necessarily controlled by prior determination that agreement violated § 8(e)
• \But damages for loss of an expectancy of profits created by prior or contemporaneous oral representations plainly contradictory with the terms of a written contract we believe to be nonrecoverable if written contracts are to retain significance.\
• “[A] remittitur may be assessed in an amount that will bring the verdict on damages to the maximum amount which the jury could have awarded under the evidence introduced at trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).