Smith v. Potter

How courts have described this case

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

• “Indiana cases discussing time of the essence clauses provide that courts do not generally view time as being of the essence of a contract unless the terms of the contract or the conduct of the parties make it so.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Barrington Management Co. v. Paul E. Draper Family Ltd.
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1998-04-30· cited 42×
• Dfs Secured Healthcare Receivables Trust v. Caregivers Great Lakes, Inc. And Marc Leestma
  Seventh Circuit· 2004-10-18· cited 35×
• Wagner v. Estate of Fox
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1999-09-27· cited 21×
• DRW Builders, Inc. v. Richardson
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1997-04-30· cited 10×
• Kokomo Tube Co. v. Dayton Equipment Services Co.
  Seventh Circuit· 1997-08-18· cited 4×
• Harrison v. Thomas
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2001-03-06· cited 2×
• Unnamed case
  Seventh Circuit· 1997-08-18
• Georgia Receivables v. Caregivers Great Lak
  Seventh Circuit· 2004-09-13

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• W & W Equipment Co., Inc. v. Mink
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1991-03-18· cited 109×
• Donavan v. Ivy Knoll Apartments Partnership
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1989-04-26· cited 54×
• National Advertising Co. v. Wilson Auto Parts, Inc.
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1991-04-25· cited 20×
• Nadeau v. Beers
  Washington Supreme Court· 1968-04-25· cited 16×
• Dullanty v. Comstock Development Corp.
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1980-01-15· cited 5×