Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
REMEDIES - Coggle Diagram
REMEDIES
NATURE AND PURPOSE OF REMEDIES
B. THREE DOMAINS
LAW
DAMAGES
B. COMPENSATORY
CONTRACTS
CONSEQUENTIAL
Rule: Consequential damages are secondary losses that result from the breach but were reasonably foreseeable at the time the contract was made.
Application: These damages cover indirect losses, such as lost profits, that flow from the breach, but only if they were within the contemplation of both parties when the contract was made.
1 more item...
LIQUIDATED
Rule: A provision in a contract specifying the amount of damages that will be paid in the event of a breach. These provisions are enforceable if they are a reasonable estimate of actual damages at the time the contract was made.
Application: Liquidated damages are enforceable as long as they are not punitive or excessive (i.e., not a penalty). Courts will examine whether the amount stipulated was a reasonable estimate of the damages likely to occur in the event of a breach.
1 more item...
RELIANCE
Rule: If expectation damages are uncertain or speculative, the plaintiff may recover reliance damages to compensate for expenditures made in reliance on the contract.
Application: Reliance damages restore the plaintiff to the position they would have been in had the contract never been made. This covers costs incurred due to the contract (e.g., money spent on preparation or performance).
1 more item...
EXPECTATION
Rule: Plaintiff is entitled to the benefit of the bargain, which means they should be put in the same position they would have been in had the contract been fully performed.
Application: This includes any loss the plaintiff would have gained from the contract had it been performed, minus any actual value received or any savings resulting from the breach.
1 more item...
NOMINAL DAMAGES
Rule: Awarded when a legal right has been breached, but no actual loss or harm has occurred. They are typically a symbolic amount (often $1).
Application: Nominal damages are awarded when a plaintiff is entitled to relief, but no substantial damages are provable (e.g., if a technical breach occurs but there’s no loss).
1 more item...
TORTS
PERSONAL INJURY
Case: Fertile v. St. Michael’s Medical Center – Valid claims for pain and suffering even without precise calculation.
Case: McDougald v. Garber – Loss of enjoyment of life is recoverable only if plaintiff is conscious.
Rule: Includes medical costs, lost wages, pain and suffering, emotional distress.
PROPERTY DAMAGE
Rule: Lesser of repair cost or diminution in market value.
Case: Portland General Electric v. Taber – Repair cost recovery unless disproportionate to property value.
1 more item...
ABSTRACT INTERESTS (NON-ECONOMIC LOSSES)
Rule: Damages for abstract interests (e.g., emotional distress, loss of consortium, reputational harm) are recoverable when the injury is proven and linked to the defendant’s wrongful conduct.
Assessment: These damages are often subjective and may be based on reasonableness or jury discretion, but the plaintiff must provide enough evidence to show a link between the wrongful act and the harm suffered.
PROBABILISTIC/FUTURE HARM
Rule: When harm is probable but not yet certain, damages can be calculated based on probability (e.g., "loss of chance" for medical recovery).
Calculation: If future harm is anticipated, damages may be awarded as a proportional share of the potential loss, based on the probability of that harm occurring.
1 more item...
A. CORE PRINCIPLES
RIGHTFUL POSITION PRINCIPLE
Rightful Position Principle: Restore the plaintiff to the position they would have been in but for the wrong.
REASONABLE CERTAINTY
Damages must be reasonably certain; speculative damages are generally not recoverable.
FORESEEABILITY
Damages must flow naturally from the defendant’s conduct and must be foreseeable at the time of breach or injury.
MITIGATION/AVOIDABLE CONSEQUENCES
Plaintiff has a duty to minimize damages once aware of the harm.
OFFSETTING BENEFITS
Defendant may reduce liability if plaintiff benefits directly from the defendant's wrongful conduct, unless the benefit was "thrust upon" the plaintiff.
ECONOMIC LOSS RULE
Purely economic damages are generally recoverable only in tort if there is physical harm or a special duty.
BIGELOW PRINCIPLE
uncertainty caused by defendant is resolved against the wrongdoer.
CASES
Harris v. Peters (rightful position)
Kenford Co. v. Erie County (foreseeability)
Raishevich v. Foster (reasonable certainty)
General Electric Co. v. Lowe’s Home Center (economic loss)
Clark v. Marsiglia; Roberts v. Pilot Freight; In re WorldCom (mitigation)
Indiana State Symphony v. Ziedonis; Hartke v. McKelway (offsetting benefits)
C. PUNITIVE DAMAGES
PURPOSES
Punishment → Law (punitive damages)
Compensation – repair the plaintiff’s loss.
Vindication → Law (nominal damages) affirm and protect rights (nominal damages, declaratory relief).
Measured by plaintiff’s harm.
Tried to a jury.
RESTITUTION
RESTITUTIONARY REMEDIES
LEGAL RESTITUTION (MONEY JUDGMENT)
FORMS OF LEGAL RESITUTION
Quasi-Contract
Implied-in-law obligation to prevent unjust enrichment when there is no valid contract.
Mistaken Payment
Recovery when one party mistakenly overpays another (Moses v. MacFerlan).
Unsolicited Benefits
No restitution for benefits that were voluntarily given or “thrust upon” the recipient (Greenspan v. Slate).
Purpose: Prevent unjust enrichment by ensuring the defendant returns the benefit they have wrongfully retained.
EQUITABLE RESTITUTION
Purpose: Ensure that the property or proceeds wrongfully obtained by the defendant are returned to the rightful party.
FORMS OF EQUITABLE RESTITUTION
Constructive Trust
Imposed when the defendant wrongfully holds property that should belong to the plaintiff.
Equitable Lien
Imposed when the defendant's property is improved using the plaintiff's resources.
Subrogation
A third party steps into the shoes of the original creditor to recover damages.
Accounting for Profits
Disgorging profits gained by fiduciaries or wrongdoers.
Focus on Defendant's gain, not plaintiff's loss
Goal: Prevent unjust enrichment
Can be legal (money judgment) or equitable
Examples: mistake payments, disgorgement of profits
PURPOSES
Restoration / Disgorgement – prevent unjust enrichment (restitution).
EQUITY
EQUITABLE REMEDIES
A. INJUNCTIONS
TYPES OF INJUNCTIONS
Mandatory (Reparative): Requires defendant to undo harm or take corrective action.
TRO: Temporary, emergency relief that can be granted without notice.
Preliminary Injunction: Preserves status quo while awaiting trial.
Permanent Injunction: Final relief after a full trial.
Requirements for Permanent Injunction:
Inadequate Legal Remedy, Irreperable harm, balance of equities, public interest
Prohibitory (Preventative): Prevent future harm from continuing or recurring.
B. SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
Purpose: Compels performance of a contract when damages are inadequate. Used for unique goods or real estate, where substitutes are not available.
C. REFORMATION
Purpose: To correct a written instrument to reflect the true intent of the parties.
Grounds: Must show mutual mistake or fraud to justify reformation.
D. RESCISSION
Purpose: Cancels the contract and returns the partiese to the status quo ante. Grounds: Mistake, fraud, duress, material breach. Effect: The aprties restore any benefits conferred.
E. EQUITABLE DEFENSES
Laches: Unreasonable delay in bringing a claim, causing prejudice to the defendant.
Unclean Hands: Plaintiff’s misconduct prevents relief.
Hardship: Denies relief if it would be oppressive or unjust.
PURPOSES
Vindication → Law (Equity (declaratory judgment) affirm and protect rights (nominal damages, declaratory relief).
Prevention/Deterrence -Prevent or compel action when damages are insufficient.
A. DEFINITION & FUNCTION
A remedy is the court’s method of enforcing a right or redressing a wrong.
Remedies are judicial, not legislative.
Remedies are about outcomes (what the court orders), not procedures.
They give meaning to legal rights — without remedies, rights are hollow.
C. RIGHTFUL POSITION PRINCIPLE
Central measure of compensatory relief.
Goal: restore plaintiff to position they would have occupied but for the wrong.
Prevents overcompensation or undercompensation.
Foundation for: 1. Law- Damages Calculation and 2. Equity - Adequacy test (is money enough?)
Case: Standard Oil Co. v. Southern Pacific (property damage measure).
D. Relationship Between Law and Equity
Historically Distincy Systems
Law → money damages, writ system, juries.
Equity → conscience-based decrees, chancellors, no jury.
Merged procedurally under modern civil rules, but remain substantively distinct.
Adequacy requirement: equity acts only when legal remedies are inadequate.
Equity acts in personam; law acts in rem
Cases
Riggs v. Palmer — equity prevents unjust enrichment (“no one profits from own wrong”).
Graf v. Hope Building Corp. — hardship can justify equitable flexibility.
Montgomery Ward v. Anderson — modern synthesis of fairness and predictability.