Question about Anticipatory Repudiation Forum

[lawschoolgiant]

Under the doctrine when the rule of adequate assurance arises, lets say from a doubt that someone is going to pay you for work you in the middle of doing, I understand that you can stop work until you have adequate assurance that the other party will tender payment or perform as promised.

Under AR you have the right to bring suit for breach right away. Under the rule of adequate assurance do you have that same right to bring suit right away?

If someone gives an answer could you possibly point me to a restatement provision that shows that, if you dont have it, no big deal.

[lawschoolgiant]

Anybody?

[lawschoolgiant]

ONE LAST BUMP!

[Mr.Feeny]

you can't bring suit unless the other party fails to provide adequate assurances in a reasonable time

[missinglink]

From my outline :

The Right to Demand Adequate Assurances and When a Failure to Give Adequate Assurances May be Treated as Repudiation

R2d § 251

1) Reasonable grounds arise—to create doubt about the other side’s future performance
2) After the K is made
3) Insecure—a party that’s feeling insecure can made a demand for assurances (has to be in writing)
4) Can Suspend Performance Until it Receives Adequate Assurances
5) The Failure to Give Assurances Amounts to Repudiation—if the obligor fails to provide such assurances w/in a reasonable time, the obligee may threat this failure as repudiation