Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Kammert Bros. Enterprises, Inc. v. Tanque Verde Plaza Co., 428 P.2d 678.

62 citing documents.

Chandler v. Roosevelt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Chandler v. Roosevelt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Or, instead of treating the contract as operable and urging performance, the innocent party can treat repudiation as final and “bring suit for the breach at any time before the other party retracts his repudiation.” Kammert Brothers Enterprises, -07 (1967); see also Restatement § 256 cmt.
Dbt Yuma LLC v. Ycaa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Dbt Yuma LLC v. Ycaa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Kammert Bros. Enters., (tender excused when seller "positively refused [buyer's] offer to perform its duties under the contract").
Ogden v. Disys Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Ogden v. Disys Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
v. Tanque Verde Plaza Co., (suit seeking damages for breach of contract was "buyer's means of enforcing its rights under the contract" under provision allowing fees for suit "to enforce or cancel" contract).
Massey v. 1st Hc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Massey v. 1st Hc Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
v. Tanque Verde Plaza Co., ).
Great Western Bank v. LJC Development, LLC 362 P.3d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Great Western Bank v. LJC Development, LLC 362 P.3d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Bank, 140 Ariz. at 283 (citing Kammert Bros. Enters., -12 (1956)).
Abromovitz v. Red Eyed Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Abromovitz v. Red Eyed Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
v. Tanque Verde Plaza Co., (citations omitted), however, are not the exclusive measure of damages for fraud.
Ralph and Carolee Thomas v. Montelucia Villas 302 P.3d 617 Ariz. 2013
Ralph and Carolee Thomas v. Montelucia Villas 302 P.3d 617 Ariz. 2013
Co. of Am., (citing Kammert Bros. Enters., 4 P.2d 678 (1967); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 277 (1981); 4 Corbin on Contracts § 977 (1951)).
Thomas v. MONTELUCIA VILLAS, LLC 275 P.3d 607 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Thomas v. MONTELUCIA VILLAS, LLC 275 P.3d 607 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Co., , (citing Kammert Bros. Enters., , 2 Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 277 (1981); 4 Corbin on Contracts § 977 (1951)).
Best v. Miranda 274 P.3d 516 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Best v. Miranda 274 P.3d 516 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
349, 360, (holding that a modification of a material term of an agreement, which was required by the statute of frauds to be in writing, must also be in writing), vacated on other grounds
Ratliff v. Hardison 199 P.3d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
Ratliff v. Hardison 199 P.3d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
See Kammert Bros. Enters., -07 , -84 (1967).
Best v. Edwards 176 P.3d 695 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Best v. Edwards 176 P.3d 695 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
349, 360 , vacated on *501 other grounds, , we addressed whether a contract required by the statute of frauds to be in writing could be orally modified to extend the buyer’s time to make contract payments.
Burkons v. Ticor Title Ins. Co. of Cal. 798 P.2d 1308 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Burkons v. Ticor Title Ins. Co. of Cal. 798 P.2d 1308 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Kammert Bros. Enters., , King v. Stanley, 32 Cal.2d 584, 588-89
Vonk v. Dunn 775 P.2d 1088 Ariz. 1989
Vonk v. Dunn 775 P.2d 1088 Ariz. 1989
See Kammert Brothers Enterprises
Oldenburger v. Del E. Webb Development Co. 765 P.2d 531 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Oldenburger v. Del E. Webb Development Co. 765 P.2d 531 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Kammert Bros. Enterprises
Esplendido Apartments v. Olsson 697 P.2d 1105 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Esplendido Apartments v. Olsson 697 P.2d 1105 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
See Kammert Bros. Enter., , Glad Tidings Church, 226 P.2d at 1021 .
Sanson v. Gonzales 688 P.2d 676 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Sanson v. Gonzales 688 P.2d 676 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Kammert Brothers Enterprises, , Arizona Title Guarantee & , , , Eyman v. Sowa, 23 Ariz.App.
United California Bank v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America 681 P.2d 390 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
United California Bank v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America 681 P.2d 390 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Kammert Brothers Enterprises
FIRST FED. S. & L. ASS'N OF PHOENIX v. Ram 659 P.2d 1323 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
FIRST FED. S. & L. ASS'N OF PHOENIX v. Ram 659 P.2d 1323 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
See also Arizona Title Guarantee & , Kammert Bros., , Freedman v. Continental Serv.
Dalton v. McLaughlin 635 P.2d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
Dalton v. McLaughlin 635 P.2d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
Cf. Kammert Brothers Enterprises, , (refusal of the buyer’s offer to perform a contract which was still binding was an anticipatory repudiation).
Coronado Co. v. Jacome's Department Store, Inc. 629 P.2d 553 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
Coronado Co. v. Jacome's Department Store, Inc. 629 P.2d 553 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
Cf. Kamert Brothers Enterprises, , (actual tender not required if it would be a useless act).
Angle v. Marco Builders, Inc. 626 P.2d 126 Ariz. 1981
Angle v. Marco Builders, Inc. 626 P.2d 126 Ariz. 1981
Kammert Brothers Enterprises, , Ceizyk v. Goar Service & Supply, Inc., 21 Ariz.App.
Freedman v. Continental Service Corp. 622 P.2d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Freedman v. Continental Service Corp. 622 P.2d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Notwithstanding his acknowledgment of the rule that the parties may agree to other than actual notice, Freedman contends that a close reading of Arizona Title Guarantee & Trust Co. v. Modern Homes, Inc., supra, Kammert Brothers Enterprises, , and Jahnke v. Palomar Financial Corporation, supra, indicates that actual notice is nevertheless required for forfeiture to occur.
Nelson v. Cannon 616 P.2d 56 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Nelson v. Cannon 616 P.2d 56 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
119 , cf. Kammert Bros. Enterprises, , Corbin on Contracts, Vol.
Davis v. First Nat. Bank of Arizona 605 P.2d 37 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Davis v. First Nat. Bank of Arizona 605 P.2d 37 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
349 , vacated on other grounds, , the court stated: “Generally, the doctrine of anticipatory breach does not apply to a contract rendered unilateral by full performance on the part of one of the contracting parties.
Heritage Heights Home Owners Ass'n v. Esser 565 P.2d 207 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Heritage Heights Home Owners Ass'n v. Esser 565 P.2d 207 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
Vacated, result as to attorneys’ fees affirmed