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.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 10 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from McCarty C. Mercury Metalcraft Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | McCarty C. Mercury Metalcraft Co. Anchor | green | “effects such a change in essential operative elements of the contract that further performance by the other party is thereby rendered ineffective or impossible, such as the causing of a complete failure of consideration or the prevention of further performance by the other party.” | 6 |
| 2 | Able Demolition, Inc v. City of Pontiac | green | “whether the nonbreaching party obtained the benefit which he or she reasonably expected to receive.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.