This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Copeland (P) subcontracted with Nalews (D) to furnish labor, materials, and services on a contract between P and the town of Lincoln. The contract was mutually rescinded without prejudice when D could not meet its deadlines. The agreement for rescission said nothing about damages for D's breach. P sued D for a breach. P claimed that the rescission had no effect on existing rights and duties and only operated in the future. D argued that the agreement canceled the contract in total. The trial court found for D. P appealed; parol evidence was improperly admitted.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.