This lesson is about satisfaction clauses. This is an area of special concern, as satisfaction clauses appear to make promises illusory.
Read moreThis lesson deals with the doctrine of Mitigation of Damages, and examines Rockingham County v. Luten Bridge Co. The basic issues about mitigation are illustrated in a hypothetical scenario followed by a number of questions.
Read moreIn this lesson you will learn how to calculate damages when the Buyer does not deliver goods or repudiates the contract.
Read moreThis lesson is part of a series that examines contract remedies. It covers the situation when the Buyer caused the breach and the UCC § 2-706 and § 2-708(1) are not the right measure of the seller's damages.
Read moreReliance damages put the non-breaching party back in the same position the party was in before the contract was made. In this lesson, you will explore the distinction between reliance and expectation damages.
Read moreThis lesson discusses cost of completion as a remedy that is awarded when there is work still to be completed under a contract, or when the work called for under the contract was completed improperly.
Read moreThis lesson explains the concept of excuse of performance by referring to K & G Construction Co. v. Harris.
Read moreIn this lesson the concept of foreseeability is illustrated by studying Hadley v. Baxendale. The author explains the meaning of the term "reasonably foreseeable" and presents multiple examples.
Read moreThe lesson takes a look at measuring expectation damages in a sale of goods contract governed by the UCC provisions.
Read moreThis lesson assumes students are familiar with the requirement of consideration. This exercise covers one of the exceptions to this general rule. Historically, one situation where consideration was not required to create a binding contract was when the promise was made "under seal." The lesson explains the history of "the seal" and the seal's role in contract law today.
Read more