Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 New Jersey opinions name it 1 courts 1986–2026 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Kel Kim Corp. v. Central Markets, Inc.green2 sentences2026Mkts, Inc., 519 N.E.2d 295, 296 (N.Y. 1987)) (finding a force majeure clause inapplicable because the contract failed to specify the specific source of natural gas the defendant would sell to the plaintiff, rather, only the price, quantity, and delivery point); see also Facto, 390 N.J. Super. at 228 (holding a force majeure clause that specifically identified a "power failure" as a circumstance that would excuse performance). 2014“Ordinarily, only if the force majeure clause specifically includes the event that actually prevents a party’s performance will that party be excused.” Ibid. | 3 | 5 |
Facto v. Pantagisgreen2 sentences2026Mkts, Inc., 519 N.E.2d 295, 296 (N.Y. 1987)) (finding a force majeure clause inapplicable because the contract failed to specify the specific source of natural gas the defendant would sell to the plaintiff, rather, only the price, quantity, and delivery point); see also Facto, 390 N.J. Super. at 228 (holding a force majeure clause that specifically identified a "power failure" as a circumstance that would excuse performance). 2025A force majeure clause "provides a means by which the parties may anticipate in advance a condition that will make performance impracticable." Facto v. Pantagis, 390 N.J. Super. 227, 231 (App. Div. 2007). | 3 | 3 |
Hess Corp. v. Eni Petroleum US, LLCgreen2 sentences2023A party's performance is only excused if the force majeure clause "specifically includes the event that actually prevents a party's performance." Ibid. (quoting Kel Kim Corp. v. Cent. 2021A party's performance is only excused if the force majeure clause "specifically includes the event that actually prevents a party's performance." Ibid. (quoting Kel Kim Corp. v. Cent. | 3 | 3 |
Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Insurance Co. of Americagreen1 sentence2023Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Inc. Co., 65 N.J. 474, 483-84 (1974). | 1 | 1 |
The Opera Company of Boston, Inc. v. The Wolf Trap Foundation for the Performing Artsgreen2 sentences2007See Opera Co. of Boston, supra, 817 F. 2d at 1100-01 . 2007See Opera Co. of Boston, Inc. v. Wolf Trap Found. for Performing Arts, 817 F.2d 1094 (4th Cir.1987) (power failure that prevented safe performance of concert). | 1 | 1 |
Buono Sales, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp.green1 sentence1986Buono Sales, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp., 363 F. 2d 43, 47 (3 Cir.1966), cert. den. 385 U.S. 971 , 87 S.Ct. 510 , 17 L.Ed. 2d 435 1966); 17 Am.Jur. 2d, supra, § 409; 24 P.O.F. 2d at 291 (1980); see Abeles v. Adams Engineering Co., supra, 64 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Abeles v. Adams Engineering Co., Inc.green1 sentence1986Buono Sales, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp., 363 F. 2d 43, 47 (3 Cir.1966), cert. den. 385 U.S. 971 , 87 S.Ct. 510 , 17 L.Ed. 2d 435 1966); 17 Am.Jur. 2d, supra, § 409; 24 P.O.F. 2d at 291 (1980); see Abeles v. Adams Engineering Co., supra, 64 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Virginia Power Energy Marketing, Inc. v. Apache Corp.
green
1 sentence2014Virginia Power, supra, 297 S.W.3d at 409 . 13 A-3464-12T4 Defendant argues that its performance should be excused under the portion of the force majeure clause that states that a force majeure event "shall include, but not be limited to . . . interruption and/or curtailment of Firm transportation and/or storage by Transporters." Because the transporter defendant used, Enterprise, could not make its deliveries using the Independence Trail Pipeline, defendant argues that its own performance should have been excused. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Marchak v. Claridge Commons, Inc.
green
2 sentences2007A force majeure clause must be construed, like any other contractual provision, in light of “the contractual terms, the surrounding circumstances, and the purpose of the contract.” Marchak v. Claridge Commons, Inc., 134 N.J. 275, 282 , 633 A.2d 531 (1993). 2007A force majeure clause must be construed, like any other contractual provision, in light of “the contractual terms, the surrounding circumstances, and the purpose of the contract.” Marchak v. Claridge Commons, Inc., 134 N.J. 275, 282 , 633 A.2d 531 (1993). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Chrysler Motors Corp. v. Buono Sales, Inc.
green
1 sentence1986Buono Sales, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp., 363 F. 2d 43, 47 (3 Cir.1966), cert. den. 385 U.S. 971 , 87 S.Ct. 510 , 17 L.Ed. 2d 435 1966); 17 Am.Jur. 2d, supra, § 409; 24 P.O.F. 2d at 291 (1980); see Abeles v. Adams Engineering Co., supra, 64 N.J. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.