About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations (March 2016 through June 2016) [i] (2016)

handle is hein.ali/contract0182 and id is 1 raw text is: CONTRACTS Generally Cal.App.2016. Cit. generally in case quot. in sup. In landlord's unlawful-detainer action against tenant who violated his rental agreement by failing to timely obtain renter's insurance, this court reversed the trial court's judgment for plaintiff, holding that defendant's breach did not justify forfeiture even though the agreement contained a forfeiture clause that allowed plaintiff to terminate defendant's tenancy for any breach. In making its decision, the court acknowledged that California caselaw followed the Restatement of Contracts and allowed termination in unlawful-detainer actions only if the breach was material, substantial, or total. Boston LLC v. Juarez, 245 Cal.App.4th 75, 82, 199 Cal.Rptr.3d 452, 457. Cal.App.2015. Cit. in disc. In landlord's unlawful-detainer action against residential tenant who failed to timely obtain and pay for renter's insurance pursuant to the terms of the lease, this court affirmed the trial court's conclusion that tenant could not argue or present evidence that his breach was not material. Although California courts generally followed the first Restatement of Contracts in allowing termination only if the breach could be classified as material, substantial, or total, the clear and unambiguous terms of the lease permitted forfeiture and termination of tenant's right to possession based on any breach, regardless of its importance in relation to the entire lease. Boston LLC v. Juarez, 193 Cal.Rptr.3d 521, 527, 531. CHAPTER 3. FORMATION OF INFORMAL CONTRACTS TOPIC 4. INFORMAL CONTRACTS WITHOUT ASSENT OR CONSIDERATION § 86. Promise to Pay a Debt Barred by the Statute of Limitations N.D.Ill.Bkrtcy.Ct.2015. Subsec. (1) quot. in sup. Chapter 13 debtor brought an adversary proceeding against creditor, alleging that creditor committed fraud and violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by filing a proof of claim on a debt that was barred by Illinois' statute of limitations. This court granted creditor's motion to dismiss, holding that debtor failed to state a claim. The court pointed out that a holder of a debt that was time-barred could still be a creditor with a claim, because a claim, as defined in the Bankruptcy Code, included time-barred debts. Citing Restatement of Contracts § 86, the court explained that the statute of limitations only controlled the remedy for recovery of the debt and did not extinguish the debt, reasoning that a promise to perform an antecedent contractual or quasi- contractual duty was binding if the antecedent duty was once enforceable but no longer was because of the statute of limitations. In re Glenn, 542 B.R. 833, 844. § 90. Promise Reasonably Inducing Definite and Substantial Action A L IJ For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most