Humetrix, Inc. v. Gemplus S.C.A. 268 F.3d 210 (9th Cir. 2001)
    “Under California law, a plaintiff tht prevails on a breach of contract claim “should receive as nearly as possible the equivalent of the benefits of performance,” meaning the plaintiff should be put “in as good a position as he would have been had performance been rendered as promised.” [citation omitted]  This may include lost profits if the plaintiff can prove that the defendant's failure to perform caused the plaintiff to lose profits.”

Vestar Development II, LLC  v. General Dynamics Corp., 249 F.3d 958 (9th Cir. 2001)
    Lost profits from agreement to negotiate sale of real property were too speculative to be allowed under Cal. Civ. Code § 3000 or § 3301.

In re Diego’s Inc., 88 F.3d 775 (9th Cir. 1996)
    Party is estopped from relying on statute of frauds as defense in action for breach of oral contract where other party turned down other offers in reliance on contract

In re Ankeny, 184 B.R. 64 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1995)
    Parol evidence - integrated k, letter of intent as a contract - whether principal was liable

Brinderson-Newberg Joint Venture v. Pacific Erectors, Inc., 971 F.2d 272 (9th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 914 (1993)
    Parol evidence inadmissible when it contradicts the plain meaning of the contract

Moore v. Pollock (In re Pollock), 139 B.R. 938  (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1992)
    Severability of security agreement from lease
    Whether multiple obligations in an agreement are severable is a question of state law.  Under Cal. Law, this is a question of the parties intent based upon the substance and language of the agreement at issue.  Keene v. Harling, 61 Cal.2d 318, 320 (1964); Gardinier, 831 F.2d at 976.  The Gardinier court noted three factors that should be considered in analyzing whether obligations within an agreement are severable (1) whether nature and purpose of the obligations are different (2) whether consideration for the obligations is distinct and (3) whether obligation statute of frauds the parties are interrelated .

Schneider v. TRW, Inc., 938 F.2d 986 (9th Cir. 1991)
    Wrongful termination

Foley v. Interactive Data Corp. 47 Cal.3d 654 (1988)
    Tort theories restricted in wrongful termination action

Ins. Co. Of State of Pa. v. Assoc. Int’l Ins. Co., 922 F.2d 516 (9th Cir. 1990)
    Contracts/insurance - although primary insurer breached notice provision in reinsurance k when faced with a claim, the reinsurer nonetheless was not relieved from its obligation under the k because of its failure to show actual and substantial prejudice to maintain a late notice defense.

In re Mediscan Research, Ltd., 109 B.R. 392 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1989), aff’d, 940 F.2d 558 (1991)
    Impossibility - amendment to debtor’s agreement ruled unenforceable for insufficient consideration and fraud

Milgard Tempering, Inc. v. Selas Corp. of America, 902 F.2d 703 (9th Cir. 1990)
    Cap on consequential damages can be removed if repair clause in contract fails of its essential purpose

First Citizens Federal S&L Ass’n. v. Worthen Bank and Trust Co., 906 F.2d 427 (9th Cir. 1990)
    Fiduciary relationship should not be inferred in bank loan participation agreements absent unequivocal language to that effect in the agreement