Remedies Cases

• Established prevailing language of foreseeability and effect
• Established 2 contexts for contract damages

• Where damages arise from the very forces set in motion that dcreated the duty and risk of harm, unforeseeability of the exact developments and extent of loss will not limit liability
• (at some point it becomes too tenuous)

• Bank could not have estimated the consequences of its negligence and
• The plantiff could have averted disaster by simple precautions

• makes distinction betwen two kinds of special talents
• Trained and natural

• Gives us the lost chance doctrine
• Failed to properly diagnose chronic infection, lost his leg

Exception to strict certainty rules where defendant by his own wrong prevented a more precise computation

Where damage is certain result of wrong, then libralize rule to uncertainty with respect to amount

When defendant made it dificult to ascertain precise damages, defendant cant complain that the damages arent precise

Must be evidence of damages existence and extent, and some data from which they may be computed, no substantial recovery based on guesswork or inference

party seeking damages in K need not prove amount with absolute certainty, reasonable showing sufficient

Damages must be certain in both amont and whether they will result at all

• Rejects distinction between major and minor sugery
• Key is if proposed treatment could aggravate, develop new, or slight prospect of improvement, there is no duty

Injured obliged to excersise ordinary care in seeking treatment, has right to avoid peril to life, however slight and undue risks to health and angiosh beyond bounds of reason

Reasonable standard to unique persons (religious objections to transusions

Reasonablness is a jury question except in the clearest of cases (recomended excercises to alleviate problems)

Fair because agreement would have been binding if loss was greater (both sides took calculated risk)

No damages since equitable principles applicable where no actual loss, court must do justice

Damages may be recovered under such clause even if no actual damages, so long as clause survives penalty attack

• Mass tort punitives
• determines that the courts can work with this worst case scenerio

• upheld 10mil punitives with 19k compensatory
• due process requires reasonableness standard, here award not grossly excessive

oregon constitutional amendment prohibiting revew of punitive awards was unconstitutional (judicial review=dueprocess)

gives ballpark of 10-1 for punitives, says that 500-1 is clearly breathtaking and raises judicial eybrow

affirms procedural and subnstantive constitutional limits of punitives, vague instructions to avoid passion and prejudice inadequate

• Talking about punitives
• Punishment should fit crime
• Defendant should have reasonable notice of sanctions
• Punishment should be based on worn commited, not status of defendant

• fact that remedy at law is available doesnt oust equity court of equity
• does the RAL compare favorably with remedy in equity

court enforces the arbitration agreement for specific performance

undesirable to require husband to undertake legal proceedings against his wife, expecially while they live together

50 registration vs. 50-100k loss

hard, not uncounscionable, contract with carrot farmer not enforceable at equity (too hard for a court of conscience to enforce)

refuses to enforce deed restriction barring use of park for housing for returning vets

point is reached so that incarceration becomes penal, ceases to serve its coercive purpose

petetioners violated court order, even though the injunction should not have been issued, the violation is contempt

• Lack of Jurisdiction
• Injunction transparently invalid
• Sought challenge but faced delay or frustration

• rejects injunction, named parties included jon does
• says it would invite catastrophe...deprivations of due process, and jurisdictional flaws

most significant requirement for recovery on a quasi contract is that the enrichment to the defendant must be unjust

court notes that restitution is available not just in rescission cases, but as an alternative remedy

Whenever services are rendered and received, a contract of hiring or an obligation to pay what they are reasonably worth will be presumed

law will never permit a friendly act, or such as was intended to be an act of kindness or benevolence to avfterwards be converted to pecuniary demand

Contractor repairing D's building, building catches on fire and Contracter repairs to "save" building, D held liable in quasi

benefit was satisfaction of obtaining the other persons compliance with his request to perform services (direct benefit still applies as defense when party did not request performance)

Benefit in quantum meruit is value of goods and services provided

Contract price is rule of thumb measure where actual enrichement or benefit is difficult to prove

higher taxes and investment of funds into mingled business account insufficient to satisfy change in position

all that is required to establish constructive trust is wrongful act resulting in transfer of property and consequent unjust enrichment of another (must trace funds)

Tracing requirement may be relaxed where necessary to avoid harsh consequences of legal formalism

• Current salary x work years till 65 - min wage work till 65- compensation already recieved + pain and suffering award=damages
• also inflation should affect both future earnings and discounting

sustaining collateral source rule against claim oramsy was receivi0ng monthly railroad disability benefits

• Infants cry of hurt is as poignant as the most detailed exposition
• Pain and suffering can be inferred

awarded damages to all parties, lump sum to family, special to husband and seperate to neighbor

• damages for violation of right inconsistant with actual injury principle
• Abstract value of right may not be basis for compensatory award

Equity will not enjoin a libel

No award for injury to democracy

Court sustains cost of repair, even though its not going to be repaird

• permanent injury=MV of loss
• not permanant= cost of restoration even if greater than MV loss

• harsh rule for stealing slate
• uses plaintiffs value for decorative slate
• no punitives though

• built accidently on wrong lot
• holds for improver to prevent unjust enrichment

• breached covenant by blocking protected airspace
• no right to equitable relief

essential factor distinguishing between permanant and temporary nuisance is abatability

Register may not now elect to disaffirm because as a matter of law it has elected to affirm

• Buyer sough rescission after 4 yrs
• Return not required to be in identical condition, only return reasonable value

Real duty is to award victim of fraud all damages which are a proximate result of the wrong he comitted

• gives 2 contexts for recission where fraud
• here he didnt get what he thought he was getting

Were gains were proximate consequence of fraud the windfalls should go to defrauded party and disgorge fraudulent enrichment

party who knows they dont know assumed the risk

mistake of fact is basis for restitution, mistake of law is not

Sterile Cow

rock was a diamond

award of consequentials not barred in rescission actions under election of remedies theory

basic assumption of the contract, neither party bore risk so K voided