Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
In January, a teacher contracted with a summer camp to serve as its head counselor at a salary of $10,000 for 10 weeks, from the first of June to the middle of August. In March, the camp notified the teacher that it had hired someone else as head counselor and that the teacher's services would not be needed. In April, the teacher spent $200 traveling to interview at the only other nearby summer camp for a position as its head counselor. The teacher was not chosen for that job. The teacher then took a position teaching in a local summer school at a salary of $6,000 for the same 10-week period.
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. The goal is to put the teacher in the position he would have occupied but for the breach. $4,000 is a wrong answer because it fails to provide for recovery of the $200 expense the teacher incurred in the reasonable, albeit unsuccessful, effort to mitigate damages by applying for the head counselor position at the other summer camp. The fact that the effort to mitigate was unsuccessful does not mean that the expense is not recoverable. Accordingly, the teacher is entitled to recover the difference between the contract salary ($10,000) and the amount earned at the local summer school ($6,000), plus the reasonable expenses incurred in seeking to mitigate after the breach ($200 in travel expenses).
C is incorrect. The goal is to put the teacher in the position he would have occupied but for the breach. An award of $10,000 would overcompensate the teacher, violating the principle of expectation damages. The teacher successfully sought other employment for the same time period as covered in the contract, and the amount earned on that job must be taken into account in calculating damages. There is no suggestion here that the teacher could have held both jobs simultaneously, earning both salaries. In addition, this answer fails to compensate the teacher for the travel expenses incurred in mitigating damages. The fact that the effort to mitigate was unsuccessful does not mean that the expense is not recoverable. The proper recovery is the difference between the contract salary ($10,000) and the amount earned at the local summer school ($6,000), plus the reasonable expenses incurred in seeking to mitigate after the breach ($200 in travel expenses).
D is incorrect. The goal is to put the teacher in the position he would have occupied but for the breach. An award of $10,200 would overcompensate the teacher, violating the principle of expectation damages. The teacher successfully sought other employment for the same time period as covered in the contract, and the amount earned on that job must be taken into account in calculating damages. There is no suggestion here that the teacher could have held both jobs simultaneously, earning both salaries. This answer does take into account the unsuccessful effort to mitigate damages, which is appropriate. Accordingly, the proper recovery is the difference between the contract salary ($10,000) and the amount earned at the local summer school ($6,000), plus the reasonable expenses incurred in seeking to mitigate after the breach ($200 in travel expenses).