Legal Opinion
Churchill v. Winter Chevrolet Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 6, 2008No. 06-15685Published
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM *
On appeal, David Churchill challenges a jury instruction. We agree with Churchill that under Cal. Civ. Pro. § 1440 and Romano v. Rockwell Int’l, Inc., 14 Cal.4th 479, 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 20, 926 P.2d 1114, 1119 (1996), repudiation by Winter Chevrolet gave Churchill an election to sue for damages for the breach without continuing his performance, or else to continue his performance and sue for damages resulting from the threatened breach if and when it happened. Churchill conceded in his brief that the jury was correctly instructed on this point.
Although Churchill was entitled to make…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Romano v. Rockwell International, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1996
- Chinn v. China National Aviation Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1955
- Lucian v. All States Trucking Co.California Court of Appeal · 1981
- Hill v. Kaiser AetnaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007