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

Case Citations July 2015 through February 2016 [1] (2015-2016)

handle is hein.ali/seccontract0181 and id is 1 raw text is: CONTRACTS 2D Generally Colo.2015. Cit. generally in disc., cit. generally in treatise cit. in disc. In a case in which holder of a lien on car-accident victim's proceeds from a personal-injury claim brought a breach-of-assignment action against tortfeasor's liability insurer, this court held that the purported assignment of rights to payment was ineffective because the assignment agreement was inadequate. In reaching its decision, the court acknowledged that Colorado courts looked to the Restatements of Contracts as persuasive authority on the law of assignments. Allstate Insurance Company v. Medical Lien Management, Inc., 348 P.3d 943, 946, 947. CHAPTER 1. MEANING OF TERMS § 1. Contract Defined Iowa, 2015. Com. (c) quot. in sup. Husband and wife who were guests at a resort that provided free alcoholic beverages brought an action under Iowa's dramshop law against resort, among others, alleging that defendant was liable for injuries husband received from an assault by an intoxicated guest. The trial court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment, finding that defendant did not sell guest alcoholic beverages because defendant did not charge for the beverages and guest's father paid for his stay at the resort. Reversing and remanding, this court held that defendant sold guest alcoholic beverages within the meaning of the statute. Citing Restatement Second of Contracts § 1, Comment c, the court pointed out that defendant provided paying guests with the amenity of free alcoholic beverages during boat cruises that were included in the price for a stay at the resort, and there was no evidence that the cost of guest's stay did not include the alcoholic beverages. Sanford v. Fillenwarth, 863 N.W.2d 286, 293. § 2. Promise; Promisor; Promisee; Beneficiary S.D.2014. Quot. in case quot. in sup. Former employee sought workers' compensation benefits under a theory of promissory estoppel from former employer's insurer, alleging that insurer promised to pay his medical bills, and he relied on that promise and let the statute of limitations on his claim against another former employer to run. The Department of Labor ruled in favor of insurer and the trial court affirmed. Affirming, this court held, inter alia, that plaintiff did not establish by clear and convincing evidence that defendant promised to pay plaintiff's medical bills in perpetuity. Quoting Restatement Second of Contracts § 2, the court noted that the promise needed to justify plaintiff in understanding that a commitment had been made. Martz v. Hills Materials, 857 N.W.2d 413, 418. Vt.2015. Subsec. (1) quot. in sup. Former town manager who was terminated from his position brought claims sounding in, among other things, promissory estoppel against town and its individual selectboard oA L l r, 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