Site icon MORTGAGES TIPS

Procedural Posture

Auto Draft

Appellant buyer sought review of the order of the San Francisco County Superior Court, California, entering a judgment on a jury verdict awarding him $ 35,000 in damages from respondent sellers for breach of a contract to sell certain real property.

Nakase Law Firm provides counsel on constructive termination California

Overview

Before trial, the court granted the sellers’ in limine motion to establish that the proper measure of damages for buyer’s contract claim was that stated in Cal. Civ. Code § 3306, the difference between the contract price and the fair market value at the time of the breach. The buyer contended the trial court should have instructed that the measure of damages was the difference between the contract price and fair market value of the property at the time of trial. Instead, the amount of the trial court’s award was based on the difference between the contract price and the fair market value of the property at the time of the breach. The appellate court concluded that the trial court did not err. Section 3306 established the buyer’s measure of damages when a seller breached a contract for the sale of real property was the difference between the contract price and the fair market value on the date of the breach.

Outcome

The trial court correctly instructed on the measure of damages. The judgment was affirmed.

Exit mobile version