Westminster Investing Corp. v. Lamps Unlimited, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting the principle adopted in an Oklahoma case that \the limitation period began to run when the damages could be ascertained with specificity\
• stating that the essential elements of a cause of action for breach of contract are: (1) a legal obligation of a defendant to the plaintiff, (2) a violation or breach of that right or duty, and (3) a consequential injury or damage to the plaintiff
• rejecting contention that “a new cause of action” occurred every day defendant breached contract during seven year period
• rejecting the tenant’s “continuing breach” theory that a separate cause of action spawned each day the landlord failed to enforce uniform operating hours in violation of a contract
• rejecting continuous breach theory based on landlord’s continuing failure to enforce a contract provision and holding that the statute of limitations ran from the date of the initial breach
• evidence that landlord gave “continued assurances that it would take appropriate measures” to correct continuing breaches of lease was insufficient to estop landlord from pleading statute of limitations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).