What would you do?
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
From: Austin
2x6, you advocated (origanally):
"VaporTrail's offer to refund the money isn't good enough. Krazik is entitled to the benefit of his deal - the headers."
Your original post advocated Krazik to receive the headers. This IS specific performance. Highly unlikely except in cases of unique goods and real estate.
Now you state:
"Damages therefore would be measured by the cost to cover (purchase of similar item at market)"
Cost to cover could be calculated numerous ways. For example, the cost of new parts minus depreciation. Or, the cost of used parts. Either way, you end up the same. Refund, not headers.
Bottom line, your first statement is erroneous, and I agree with your restatement of the Restatement.
"VaporTrail's offer to refund the money isn't good enough. Krazik is entitled to the benefit of his deal - the headers."
Your original post advocated Krazik to receive the headers. This IS specific performance. Highly unlikely except in cases of unique goods and real estate.
Now you state:
"Damages therefore would be measured by the cost to cover (purchase of similar item at market)"
Cost to cover could be calculated numerous ways. For example, the cost of new parts minus depreciation. Or, the cost of used parts. Either way, you end up the same. Refund, not headers.
Bottom line, your first statement is erroneous, and I agree with your restatement of the Restatement.
Thread Starter
Administrator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 17,004
Likes: 7
From: Santa Cruz, CA, US
Hey VT for the record,
I have gotten an e-mail from one of the other two buyers. He may have decided not to post, but he was just as un happy as I was about the whole thing.
I have gotten an e-mail from one of the other two buyers. He may have decided not to post, but he was just as un happy as I was about the whole thing.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,371
Likes: 0
From: newport beach
Ahh, to restate, in more detail, if Krazik could purchase comparable headers at the same or lesser price than the contract price, then there would be no damages. However, if VT's sale price is below current market, then the difference between the cost to cover (replacement) and the contract price would be a positive number, i.e., damages.
Therefore, if the contract price was $1,000, and Krazik made a commercially reasonable purchase at market of comparable goods at say $1,200, then the measure of damages would be the difference, plus interest, and any transactional purchase costs.
Therefore, if the contract price was $1,000, and Krazik made a commercially reasonable purchase at market of comparable goods at say $1,200, then the measure of damages would be the difference, plus interest, and any transactional purchase costs.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
From: Austin
Agreed, except for your apparent certainty of recovering interest and transactional costs. You can claim these, but you may not get them.
Finally, I think we can agree on 'no specific performance' right? That is, Krazik doesn't get VT's parts. If I am not mistaken, that's what you originally advocated by referring to "the headers".
In any event, hopefully all this is moot. VT leaves sells his parts, sells his cabrio, leaves the s2k board, leaving you and Strike to fight over other stuff.
Finally, I think we can agree on 'no specific performance' right? That is, Krazik doesn't get VT's parts. If I am not mistaken, that's what you originally advocated by referring to "the headers".
In any event, hopefully all this is moot. VT leaves sells his parts, sells his cabrio, leaves the s2k board, leaving you and Strike to fight over other stuff.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post