1 / 90

George Mason School of Law

George Mason School of Law. Contracts II Reliance/Restitution/Punitives This file may be downloaded only by registered students in my class, and may not be shared by them F.H. Buckley fbuckley@gmu.edu. Next day. This week. Reliance Restitution Punitives Lost-volume seller.

graham-harding
Télécharger la présentation

George Mason School of Law

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. George Mason School of Law Contracts II Reliance/Restitution/Punitives This file may be downloaded only by registered students in my class, and may not be shared by them F.H. Buckley fbuckley@gmu.edu

  2. Next day

  3. This week • Reliance • Restitution • Punitives • Lost-volume seller

  4. The measure of damages • If damages are meant to compensate for a wrong, just what is the wrong? • Failure to perform: Expectation damages • Inviting detrimental reliance: reliance damages

  5. The interplay of the measures of damages • When might reliance damages exceed expectation damages? • When might damages be limited to the reliance measure?

  6. Could reliance damages exceed the expectation measure? • When would a Π want more than expectation damages?

  7. Could reliance damages exceed the expectation measure? • When would a Π want more than expectation damages? • Bad bargains

  8. Could reliance damages exceed the expectation measure? • When would a Π want more than expectation damages? • Bad bargains • Restrictions on the expectation measure • Uncertainty • Forseeability

  9. The measure of damages • When would the Π prefer reliance damages? • Should the Π have the option in such cases?

  10. Freund at 95 • Semble reliance damages not to exceed the expectation interest, or else a windfall

  11. When should the Π be limited to reliance damages?

  12. When should the Π be limited to reliance damages? • Contracts with Physicians • Hawkins v. McGee at 892

  13. When should the Π be limited to reliance damages? • Hawkins v. McGee at 892 • Was the doctor negligent?

  14. When should the Π be limited to reliance damages? • Hawkins v. McGee at 892 • Was the doctor negligent? • Had he been negligent, what would the damages have been?

  15. When should the Π be limited to reliance damages? • Hawkins v. McGee at 892 • Was the doctor negligent? • Had he been negligent, what would the damages have been? • Return of doctor’s fee • Pain and suffering from the operation • Difference between the before-and-after hand

  16. When should the Π be limited to reliance damages? • Hawkins v. McGee at 892 • Was the doctor negligent? • In short, reliance damages • Return of doctor’s fee • Pain and suffering from the operation • Difference between the before-and-after hand

  17. When should the Π be limited to reliance damages? • Hawkins v. McGee at 892 • What did the court award?

  18. When should the Π be limited to reliance damages? • Hawkins v. McGee at 892 • What did the court award? • The difference between the hand as promised and the hand after the operation less the doctor’s fee

  19. When should the Π be limited to reliance damages? • Hawkins v. McGee at 892 • What did the court award? • The difference between the hand as promised and the hand after the operation less the doctor’s fee • I.e., The expectation interest

  20. Why a different result in Sullivan v. O’Connor at 890?

  21. Why a different result in Sullivan v. O’Connor at 890? • What did the judge instruct the jury?

  22. Why a different result in Sullivan v. O’Connor at 890? • What did the judge instruct the jury? • Out of pocket expenses incident to the operation • Damages for the way in which the nose was made worse • Pain and suffering for the third operation • Loss of earnings too uncertain

  23. Why a different result in Sullivan v. O’Connor at 890? • What didn’t the Π ask for the difference between the nose as promised and delivered?

  24. Why a different result in Sullivan v. O’Connor at 890? • What didn’t the Π ask for the difference between the nose as promised and delivered? • Was this really a case which denied the expectation measure?

  25. Why a different result in Sullivan v. O’Connor at 890? • What didn’t the Π ask for the difference between the nose as promised and delivered? • Can one generalize this to all non-commercial cases, as Fuller and Perdue argue at 894?

  26. Why a different result in Sullivan v. O’Connor at 890? • What didn’t the Π ask for the difference between the nose as promised and delivered? • Can one generalize this to all non-commercial cases, as Fuller and Perdue argue at 894? • What is the link between Pond v. Harris and Smith v. Sherman in n. 6?

  27. Why a different result in Sullivan v. O’Connor at 890? • What didn’t the Π ask for the difference between the nose as promised and delivered? • Could a court award damages for pain and suffering and emotional distress in contract?

  28. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster Robert Stack as Eliot Ness

  29. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • The FBI invited college graduates to work as clerical staff because of the possibility of receiving preferential consideration as special agents

  30. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • The FBI invited college graduates to work as clerical staff because of the possibility of receiving preferential consideration as special agents • The FBI stopped the program in 1977 because (1) they weren’t getting qualified people, and (2) the FBI wanted to institute an affirmative action program.

  31. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument?

  32. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • Reversed on appeal

  33. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • If it would succeed, what kind of damages?

  34. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • If it would succeed, what kind of damages? • What are the problems with expectation damages here?

  35. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • If it would succeed, what kind of damages? • What are the problems with expectation damages here? • Uncertainty • FBI’s right to terminate

  36. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • If it would succeed, what kind of damages? • Do expectation damages place a ceiling on reliance damages?

  37. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • If it would succeed, what kind of damages? • Do expectation damages place a ceiling on reliance damages? • Albert v. Armstrong at 901

  38. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • If it would succeed, what kind of damages? • Do expectation damages place a ceiling on reliance damages? • Albert v. Armstrong at 901 • What might have given Armstrong the option to sue for reliance damages, and how were they limited?

  39. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • If it would succeed, what kind of damages? • Do expectation damages place a ceiling on reliance damages? • Yes—but no proof that a bad bargain and onus was on the FBI

  40. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • If it would succeed, what kind of damages? • So what are the reliance damages?

  41. The measure of damages • Kizas v. Webster • So what do you think of the takings argument? • If it would succeed, what kind of damages? • So what are the reliance damages? • The difference between what they received as FBI employees (and for a year afterwards) and what they would have received in the labor market, plus dislocation

  42. Reliance damages and uncertainty of the expectation • The expectation interest is sizable but uncertain • The expectation interest is likely trivial but uncertain Cf. Restatement 349, Comment a

  43. Reliance damages and uncertainty of the expectation • Wartzman v. Hightower at 901

  44. Reliance damages and uncertainty of the expectation • Wartzman v. Hightower at 901 • Why a problem with expectation damages?

  45. Reliance damages and uncertainty of the expectation • Anglia v. Reed 902 Robert Reed, The Brady Bunch

  46. Anglia v. Reed • What was the problem with expectation damages? • If expectation damages are speculative, could any reliance damages be awarded?

  47. Anglia v. Reed • What was the problem with expectation damages? • If expectation damages are speculative, could any reliance damages be awarded? • Both pre- and post-contract reliance damages awarded

  48. Restitution or Unjust Enrichment • A general principle of restitution out of Quasi Contract, Money had and received, breach of fiduciary duty

  49. Bailey v. West • When is quasi-contractual liability imposed? • Benefit conferred on defendant by plaintiff • Appreciation by defendant of the benefit • It would be inequitable to permit the defendant to retain the benefit

  50. Restitution • Bailey v. West p. 5 • What should the Πs have done with the horse? • No recovery for officious intermeddler

More Related