Schultz v. Jackson

How courts have described this case

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

• where contract excluded consequential damages, plaintiffs sole remedy is repair or replacement of defective parts
• “While this portion of the agreement is not a model of draftsmanship, we believe this language is sufficient to rebut the presumption that remedies stated in the contract are cumulative to those contained in the Code”
• the contract language was sufficient to limit the plaintiff's remedy to the repair or replacement of defective parts and to rebut a presumption that contract remedies were cumulative to those in the Uniform Commercial Code
• the contract language was sufficient to limit the plaintiffs remedy to the repair or replacement of defective parts and to rebut a presumption that contract remedies were cumulative to those in the Uniform Commercial Code

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).