Case
Sondoval’s Sentence
Highlights/Plot Points
White vs. Benkowski
Compensatory damages are not required to be
ascertained with mathematical certainty;
reasonable damages may be awarded to
compensate for actual injury proven, though
punitive damages are not generally available
even for intentional breach of contract
Benkowski gave water to Whites under a
contract. Benkowski breached contract.
Lawyer did not not pursue consequential
damages.
Sullivan v. O’Connor
To determine the remedy for breach of a
doctor-patient contract for a nose operation
that worsened the nose’s condition and
appearance of the nose and required a third
operation not originally contemplated,
expectation damages not awarded where
promise uncertain and damages difficult to
estimate; restitution damages of fees paid too
meager in light of injury and breach; reliance
damages appropriate to compensate plaintiffs
for costs, worsening of condition and pain and
suffering from third operation.
Common Law but analogized that with UCC in
order to determine damages.
Nose job. Dr promised 2 surgeries but did 3
and messed the nose up. Touch on negligence.
Hardesty V. Smith
Competent parties are free to make their own
bargains and fix the value of their
consideration; the court will not evaluate the
adequacy of consideration, absent fraud or
misrepresentation.
Transaction 1. Isham sells rights to idea of
light bulb to Smith. Smith gives a promissory
note to Isham. Transaction 2. Isham sells the
promissory note to hardesty for X amount of
Money. Transactrion 3. Hardesty tries to
collect the X amount of money from Smith.
Smith says he did not get anything.
At the time of the making of the bargain, there
was value. We assess AT THE TIME OF THE
CONTRACT was there value. It doesn’t
matter how the deal turned out, but at the time
you valued it.
Smith argued that he received a 0 and therefore
there was a lack of consideration. However at
the time of the contract, there was a value.
Doughtery v. Salt
A promise which is not based on a bargained
for exchange is a gift; ordinarily, past acts are
not sufficient to support a promise.
Maughs v. Porter
A bargained-for act provides consideration
when the requested act is performed.
Hamer V. Sidway
A bargained-for agreement to forbear from
engaging in a legal right provides
consideration.
Baehr V Penn O tex Oil Corp
Forbearance may serve as consideration only
when it is the result of a bargain which is a
negotiated, voluntary assumption of an
obligation by one party upon the promise by
another
Neuhoff v. Marvin Lumber
Forbearance cannot be implied merely from
one party’s alleged forbearance which is not
based on a bargain between the parties
Springstead V Needs
Forbearance does not provide consideration if
no colorable legal claim exists upon which
forbearance is based.
De Los Santos V Great Western Sugar
Company
Wood v Lady Duff Gordon
Weiner V McGrawhill
Mattei v Hopper
Siegel