Warning
Info
- - tl;dr
- - ICRA
- - Facts & Holding
- - DeepDive
0 0
Washington Court of Appeals - 67 P.3d 1128, 116 Wash. App. 645
Tags: Contracts, Expectation damages, Remedies, Breach
tl;dr:
Plaintiff contracted Defendant to fill land for development purposes. Initially, Defendant delivered fill to Plaintiff, but the government eventually directed Defendant to stop providing these excavated materials to Plaintiff.Video Summary
Case Summary
In Egerer v. CSR West, LLC (2003), the Washington Court of Appeals ruled on a contract dispute between a landowner, Robert Egerer, and a fill supplier, CSR West, LLC. The matter concerned a breach of contract for nondelivery of goods by CSR West. Egerer had contracted with CSR West to purchase all the shoulder excavations from a highway project at $0.50 per cubic yard. However, CSR West failed to deliver and offered Egerer replacement fill at a higher price.
Egerer sued CSR West for the breach and sought damages for nondelivery. The trial court awarded Egerer damages, calculated as the difference between the agreed price and the market price of pit run gravel at the time he obtained quotes for replacement fill. Prejudgment interest was also granted from the date of the breach. However, the trial court denied Egerer's request for consequential damages for lost profits and increased construction costs.
Both parties appealed, and the court upheld the trial court's decisions, stating that the damages and prejudgment interest calculations were correct. The court also held that consequential damages were denied due to insufficient proof of reasonable certainty or causation.
This case is relevant as it demonstrates how damages for breach of contract for nondelivery of goods are calculated. Those damages are based on the difference between market prices at the time of the breach and the contract price, as well as any incidental and consequential damages. Prejudgment interest may also be awarded on liquidated claims where an objective source, such as market value, can determine them.
DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition
The case involves a breach of contract by CSR West to supply fill for land development. The plaintiff required more fill material than what was supplied by Wilder Construction. The court affirmed the measure of damages based on unchallenged findings of fact entered after a bench trial. The plaintiff purchased fill material in 1995 at a rate of $1.10 per cubic yard. The appeal concerns the calculation of damages based on hypothetical cover, the allowance of prejudgment interest, and the denial of the plaintiff's requests to include sales tax and consequential damages in the award of damages. The court found breach and applied the Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.) to determine the measure of damages. The court limited Egerer's damages to those for nondelivery under section 2-713 of the U.C.C. The damages were calculated as the difference between the contract price and the market price of the replacement material at the time of the breach. The trial court awarded Egerer prejudgment interest calculated at the statutory rate, beginning in July 1997 when CSR retained profits from the breach. CSR challenges this conclusion, arguing that Egerer's damages were not liquidated.
LSD+ Case Briefs
Features
- DeepDive for detailed case analysis
- Over 50,000 existing case briefs
- Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
- Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
- Social learning with chat and high points
Over 50,000 Cases Briefed
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
14-Day Free Trial
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Integrated Legal Dictionary
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Brief anything. Instantly.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Social Learning with Chat and High Points
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Real-Time Brief Feedback
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.