Williams v. Anderson

How courts have described this case

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

• a damages description of “30% of the price” was sufficient under the state version of FRCP 26(a)(1) because (1) the description “disclosed both the fact of damages and the method by which those damages would be calculated” and (2) the defendant knew the price

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Bad Ass Coffee v. Royal Aloha
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2020-08-20· cited 13×
• Butler v. Mediaport Entertainment
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2022-03-24· cited 7×
• Johansen v. Johansen
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2021-11-26· cited 6×
• Vanlaningham v. Hart
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2021-09-02· cited 3×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Design Strategy, Inc. v. Davis
  Second Circuit· 2006-10-19· cited 200×
• City & County of San Francisco v. Tutor-Saliba Corp.
  N.D. California· 2003-10-02· cited 62×
• Pete v. Youngblood
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2006-07-20· cited 34×
• Askew v. Hardman
  Utah Supreme Court· 1996-06-07· cited 21×
• Sleepy Holdings LLC v. Mountain West Title
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2016-03-31· cited 21×
• Nielsen v. Bell
  Utah Supreme Court· 2016-03-24· cited 4×