Ad
related to: termination clauses in contracts california rules of judicial ethics
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A leading court decision discussing the conflict between California law and the laws of other states is the 1998 California 4th District Court of Appeal decision Application Group, Inc. v. Hunter Group, Inc. [18] In Hunter, a Maryland company required that its Maryland-based employee agree to a one-year non-compete agreement. The contract ...
First, where a party to a contract exercises an express right of termination, he or she is sometimes said to have exercised a right to rescind the contract. Secondly, where a party is faced with a repudiation, the party can elect to terminate the contract; this too has often been referred to as an election to rescind. "Rescission" at common law.
Under this clause, the contractor could claim a profit allowance for work it already had performed, but not for anticipated profits. However, the company argued that because the Army had failed to include this termination for convenience clause in the contract, the Army's cancellation of the project constituted a breach of contract. The ...
The De Havilland Law, [1] formally De Haviland v. Warner Bros. Pictures, is a published judicial opinion interpreting California Labor Code Section 2855, [2] a California law which prevents a court from enforcing specific performance of an exclusive personal services contract (i.e., contracts creating a non-delegable duty on the part of an individual to another party, and no other, to render ...
In most jurisdictions, courts routinely "blue pencil" or reform covenants that are deemed not reasonable. The blue pencil doctrine gives courts the authority to strike unreasonable clauses from a non-compete agreement, leaving the rest to be enforced, or actually to modify the agreement to reflect the terms that the parties originally could have and probably should have agreed to. [3]
A legally binding contract is defined as an exchange of promises or an agreement between parties that the law will enforce, and there is an underlying presumption for commercial agreements that parties intend to be legally bound (Contracts 2007). In order to be a legally binding contract, most contracts must contain two elements:
An acceptance is an agreement, by express act or implied from conduct, to the terms of an offer, including the prescribed manner of acceptance, so that an enforceable contract is formed. [ 2 ] In what is known as a battle of the forms , when the process of offer and acceptance is not followed, it is still possible to have an enforceable ...
Anticipatory repudiation or anticipatory breach is a concept in the law of contracts which describes words or conduct by a contracting party that evinces an intention not to perform or not to be bound by provisions of the agreement that require performance in the future. [1] [2]