This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: interest. History: The superior court gave summary judgment in favor of the defendant, Coggins. Issue: Did the Cogginses late payment represent a material breach of the accord? Decision: No, the superior courts decision was affirmed. Reasons: A material breach is defined as a nonperformance of a duty that is so material and important as to justify the injured party in regarding the whole transaction as at an end. The court found that the previous definition was not satisfied in this case. The restatement lists five factors as significant in determining whether an action is important enough to be a material breach; time of performance is one factor. As a result, the court found that a three-day delay was not a material breach....
View Full Document
- Spring '11