preview

Potter V. US Court Case Study

Decent Essays
I. The court acknowledges the Potters lawsuit for restitution of sums paid on the property and it was not for expectancy damages. Clearly, the court stated, “By selecting the remedy of rescission and restitution, rather than expectation, or reliance damages, Potters chose what is usually the smallest awardable recovery.”(case, pg.4) Therefore, the court claims the remedy for this lawsuit was a fair decision. Since the market value of the property decreases their total recovery and the court felt it was an appropriate decision to deduct $10,800 from the awarding amount. The court rejects Oster statement that the amount should have been base on the market value when the contract was breached instead of when the performance occurs.
Get Access