Shopping Bag

0 item(s) in cart/ total: $0    view cart
Free Instant Delivery  |  No Sales Tax
Home > Case Law > Contracts  >  Hadley v. Baxendale Rule
Hadley v. Baxendale Rule
Hadley v. Baxendale Rule Cartoons

Hadley v. Baxendale Rule

Globe Refining Co. v. Landa Cotton Oil Co.; consequential damages for breach of contract are those reasonably supposed to be in the contemplation of the parties at the time the contract is made.
Your Price: $10.00

Select Usage (details) :

Related Cartoons

Duty to Investigate
Duty to Investigate
Lindholm v. Brant; Andy Warhol; Red Elvis; usual or customary practices; reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing; authority to convey title; good faith; fraud and embezzlement.
Online Agreements
Online Agreements
Specht v. Netscape Communications Corp.; clicking on a DOWNLOAD button does not communicate assent to contractual terms if the offer did not make clear; inquiry notice; constructive notice.
Right to Walk Away
Right to Walk Away
United Rentals, Inc. v. RAM Holdings, Inc.; When the examination of extrinsic evidence does not lead to an obvious, objectively reasonable conclusion, the court may apply the forthright negotiator principle.
Contract Amendment
Contract Amendment
Beneficial National Bank, U.S.A. v. Obie Payton; when the parties' original agreement specifically permits amendments, new terms may be added rather than just changes existing terms.
Liquidated Damages in Consumer Contracts
Liquidated Damages in Consumer Contracts
Cellphone Termination Fee Cases; Liquidated damages provisions in consumer contracts are presumed void, and the burden is on the proponent of such clauses to rebut that presumption.
Third Party Beneficiary Not Explicit
Third Party Beneficiary Not Explicit
Detroit Institute of Arts Founders Society v. Rose; A contract may create an obligation to a third-party without containing express language creating that obligation. Incidental benefit to third party not enough.
Induce Detrimental Reliance
Induce Detrimental Reliance
Drennan v. Star Paving Co.; A promise the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance of a definite and substantial character and that does is binding if neccessary to avoid injustice.
Unilateral Mistake Avoidance
Unilateral Mistake Avoidance
Sumerel v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.; If an offer contains a material mistake that was known by the other party, or the other had reason to know of it, the party who made the mistake has the power to avoid the contract.
Detrimental Reliance Promissory Estoppel
Detrimental Reliance Promissory Estoppel
Wright v. Newman; If the promises in connection with an invalid and unenforceable contract wrongfully cause a party to forgo a valuable legal right to his detriment, and promisor waives the right to repudiate the contract, the contract is enforceable.
Four Corners Exception
Four Corners Exception
Beanstalk Group, Inc. v. AM General Corp.; A contract will not be interpreted literally if doing so would produce absurd results. The parties are presumed to be rational persons pursuing rational ends.
Pre-Contractual Misrepresentations
Pre-Contractual Misrepresentations
Snyder v. Lovercheck; a perpetrator of fraud cannot close the lips of his innocent victim by getting him blindly to agree in advance not to complain against it as a matter of public policy.
Conduct as Contract Waiver
Conduct as Contract Waiver
Wisconsin Knife Works v. National Metal Crafters; under the Uniform Commercial Code, an attempt at contract modification that does not satisfy a contractual requirement that modifications be in writing can operate as a waiver.