Winter Panel Corp. v. Reichhold Chemicals, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that disclaimers are effective even though printed on the reverse side of the contract because a sentence on the front of the contract referred the purchaser to the reverse side
• noting that a damages-limitation clause is not unconscionable where it is “a reasonable allocation of risks between two commercial entities”
• finding that it was appropriate for the parties to allocate the risks of potential failure of a product that was a “complex, sophisticated, and at the time experimental substance”
• a damages limitation clause is not unconscionable because it is a reasonable allocation of risks between two commercial entities
• promise to supply chemical system to produce marketable installation panels not actionable where systems known to be in experimental stage
• until the Massachusetts courts choose to depart from Roto-Lith, the Federal courts in the First Circuit remain bound by its holding

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).