Boston LLC v. Juarez (2015)

Citation: Boston LLC v. Juarez (2015)
Parent Document: Boston LLC v. Juarez (2015)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2015-10-02
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3006950/boston-llc-v-juarez/ ↗

Full Text

1,152 chars

“Cardozo had occasion to examine the distinction between material and
inconsequential breaches in his landmark decision regarding substantial performance of a
construction contract. ‘The courts never say that one who makes a contract fills the
measure of his duty by less than full performance. They do say, however, that an
omission, both trivial and innocent, will sometimes be atoned for by allowance of the
resulting damage, and will not always be the breach of a condition to be followed by a
forfeiture.’ [Citation.] ‘Where the line is to be drawn between the important and the
trivial cannot be settled by a formula. . . . The question is one of degree, . . . We must
weigh the purpose to be served, the desire to be gratified, the excuse for deviation from
the letter, the cruelty of enforced adherence . . . . [The] law will be slow to impute the
purpose, in the silence of the parties, where the significance of the default is grievously
out of proportion to the oppression of the forfeiture.’ [Citation.]” (Superior Motels,
supra, 195 Cal.App.3d at p. 1051, citing and quoting Jacob & Youngs, Inc. v. Kent
(1921) 230 N.Y. 239, 241, 243-244.)

Other Sections in This Document (72)

Full Text