Add a link
The following section is to enter opinion authorship for each opinion part (concurrences, dissents, etc.).
Add an opinion part
Free text:
'''Facts''' Plaintiff contracted with defendant to have defendant excavate and screen gravel on the plaintiff’s lot. Defendant agreed to remove the sand and gravel and to leave the property at a uniform grade, substantially the same as the grade now existing at the roadway. Under the contract defendant got the Groves screening plant, and got to be rid of Groves as a competitor. After removing some of the gravel, defendant found that the reasonable cost of complying with the contract would cost upwards of $60,000 while the value of the property would have only increase by $12,160. '''Procedural History''' Judgment for plaintiff for $15,000, which was sorely disappointing. '''Issues''' Whether plaintiff is entitled to the difference in value of his land or to the reasonable cost of doing the work called for the contract which the defendant left to be undone. '''Holding''' Judgment for the plaintiff. '''Reasoning''' Damages should be calculated on the hypothetical peak of accomplishment, not value, which would have been reached had the work been done as demanded by the contract.
Save page Show changes Cancel
