an agreed exchange, any material failure of performance by one party not justified by the conduct of the other discharges the latter’s duty to give the agreed exchange even though his promise is not in terms conditional. An immaterial failure does not operate as such a discharge. Id. (emphasis added). Illinois courts also recognize the doctrine of de minimis non curat lex, “which means that courts will not regard trifles.” Pacini v. Regopoulos, 281 Ill.App.3d 274, 216 Ill.Dec. 433, 665 N.E.2d 493, 497 (1996). As that state appellate court explained, courts generally require strict compliance with contractual terms, and the failure to perform any term of a contract is a breach of contract. However, the nonperforming party is liable for damages resulting only from a material breach. Id. (<HOLDING>). Parties to a contract may make timely
holding that once a rate is filed with the appropriate agency except for review of the agencys orders the courts can assume no right to a different rate on that ground that in its opinion it is the only or the more reasonable rate holding that the proper rate for prejudgment interest is the rate fixed by the parties in a contract holding that because a 949953 occupancy rate was essentially a 95 occupancy rate the difference was de minimis and there was no breach holding that with respect to the eaja the local or national market rate for legal services cannot be a special factor used to increase the rate beyond the statutory rate holding that gas company was entitled to restitution of difference between contract rate and price paid under invalid rate order set by regulatory board