Waste Management, Inc. v. Rice Danis Industries Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a conclusion that defendant’s breach was material would not cause defendant to suffer the forfeiture of a right it otherwise would have had, and, ultimately, finding that defendant was in material breach of its agreement
• determining this factor weighed in favor of materiality because “concluding that [the breach party’s] breach was material will not cause it to suffer the forfeiture of a right it otherwise would have had”
• “Of course, a contract must not be interpreted in a manner which leads to an absurd result.”
• “a contract must be construed as a whole and the parties’ intent ascertained from the entire instrument with every provision being given effect, rather than from its detached parts.”
• “[T]here is no evidence that [the Case No. 2:23-cv-3568 Page 7 of 10 breaching party] will indemnify in the future; therefore, this factor favors concluding that there was a material breach.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).