Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

contractlawsuitbreach of contractdamagesattorneytrialwill

contractbreach of contractdamagesappealtrialwill

Related Cases

Turner v. Shalberg, 70 S.W.3d 653

Facts

Buster's Billiards was owned by Thomas A. Turner and his wife, who decided to sell the business after their son, who managed it, no longer wanted to continue. They entered into a contract with Shalberg for the sale of the business for $41,500, but shortly before the closing date, Shalberg informed Turner that he would not be closing the sale. Turner was ready to close but had to liquidate the business assets after Shalberg's breach, leading to the lawsuit for damages.

Turner and Shalberg agreed to let Geraughty continue to operate Buster's 'as long as possible, as close to the date of [Shalberg] taking over as possible so that it doesn't sit there with the lights off.'

Issue

Did Shalberg breach the contract by failing to close the sale of Buster's Billiards, and is Turner entitled to damages and attorney's fees?

Shalberg does not argue on appeal that he did not breach the contract; rather, he argues that Turner suffered no damages from the breach.

Rule

In a breach of contract case, the measure of damages is the benefit of the bargain, which is the value of the performance of the contract. The seller must show that the contract price exceeds the fair market value of the property being sold on the relevant date.

In a breach of contract case, the measure of damages is the benefit of the bargain, i.e., 'the value of the performance of the contract.'

Analysis

The court found that Shalberg failed to use reasonable diligence to obtain financing as required by the contract and that he refused to close the transaction. The court determined that Turner was ready, willing, and able to close the transaction on the scheduled date, and thus, the damages awarded were justified as the contract price exceeded the fair market value of the business assets after Shalberg's breach.

The court found that Shalberg 'failed to use reasonable diligence to obtain financing as required by the terms of the contract and that [Shalberg] failed and refused to close the transaction as required by the terms of the contract.'

Conclusion

The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that Turner was entitled to $28,500 in damages and $6,700 in attorney's fees due to Shalberg's breach of contract.

We will affirm the trial court's judgment unless there is no substantial evidence to support it, it is against the weight of the evidence, or it erroneously declares or applies the law.

Who won?

Thomas A. Turner prevailed in the case because the court found that Shalberg breached the contract and failed to mitigate damages.

The court found that Turner was 'ready, willing and able to close the transaction under the terms of the contract on the closing date.'

You must be

Log In to Casey

Sign Up to Casey

Reset Your Password

Keywords

Related Cases

Willson Imp. Co. v. Malone, 78 Ohio St. 232, 85 N.E. 51, 6 Ohio Law Rep. 90

Zelnick v. Adams, 263 Va. 601, 561 S.E.2d 711

Cruz v. Visual Perceptions, LLC, 311 Conn. 93, 84 A.3d 828, 37 IER Cases 1050

Vickers v. Wichita State University, Wichita, 213 Kan. 614, 518 P.2d 512

Hilton Oil Transport v. Oil Transport Co., S.A., 659 So.2d 1141, 1996 A.M.C. 113, 20 Fla. L. Weekly D1795