There is no citation of authority in favor of that particular approach. The fact is, the Enfields did not ignore the request for their income tax returns. The day after the note was called, the Enfields appeared at the Bank, income tax returns in hand. They were willing to allow the Bank officer to examine the returns, to allow the board of directors to examine the returns, and to allow any bank examiners to look at the returns, but they would not permit the Bank to copy the returns. We believe it is one thing to say that the borrower should provide income tax returns while it is quite another to say the borrower must permit the Bank to copy and do with those returns as it pleases.
Substantial performance is the antithesis of material breach.
The rule of 'substantial performance' is recognized and applied in the field of contract law. Substantial performance is a relative term and whether it exists is a question to be determined in each case with reference to the existing facts and circumstances. When all of the grievances are considered, separately and together, they present no more than technical variances from the letter of the contract, and courts will not deny enforcement in the face of a showing of substantial performance and in the absence of a detriment. It is apparent here that the alleged breach of the contract could in no way be said to go to the 'essence' of the agreement . . . . In Phoenix Mut.