HomeMy WebLinkAbout0963 ~ ,
The basic.r.ule governing the recovery oF damages for
breach of contract is set forth in the oft cited English case of
; ~ Hadley v. Baxendale, 9 Exch. 341, 156 Eng.Rep. 14S ~1854) which
holds that the appropriate damages are those that arise natural-
~ ly from the breach, or those that were in the contemplation of
I th~ parties at_the time .the contract was made. Application of
that rule to commercial ~ontracts, such as disability ins~~rance
~ _ .
policies, generally results in a limitation of damages to the
. . ~
pecuniary loss resulting from the breach. MacDonald v. Penn
,
iNutual Life Insurance Company, 27S So.2d 232 (,Fla. 2d DCA 1973).
However, Kewin v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company,
409 Mich. 401, 295 N.W.2d ~0 (1980) noted an exception to this
rule in the case af commercial contracts concerned not~simply ~
with trade and commerce, but with life and death and matters of
mental concern and solicitude. Tne Michigan~court found, as .
have others, that the nature and~ob~ect of the agreement may
~ ji~~stify the allowance of other types of damages such as mental _ ~
pain and ang~ish. 5 Corbin, Contracts $1076 and 1 Restatement ~
of Contracts §341 also recognize this exception. Thus, we con-
clude there is no haLd and fast rule regarding the measure of
damages for breach of con~ract. Adverting to the Hadley v.
Baxendale rule that a breach of contraet may give rise to dam- ~
~ ages which were in contemplation of the parties~at the inception
of the contract, it appears to us that if the jury finc3s that
appellee-breached the contract, Johnson is entit~ed to recover :
more than the pecuniary loss invclved in the balance of the pay-
ments due under the policy. That conclusion follows t'~e fact
that Johnson purchased the car and the disability.insurance pol-
icy- at the c:~r dealership. The purpose of acquiring the policy
- . - -
was to assure satisfaction of her car Qayments in the event of
, her disabiliky. Thus, it follows that any damages acc~ruinq to ~
,
- Johnson as a result df repossession of her ~ar for nonpayment of ~
the monthly payments due to her disability were c~ntemplated by ~
_
the parties. Those damages would be the value of the auto:nobile ~
. or the balance of payments due under the policy, whichever: is .
~
f:
_ ~ 3^ 800K ~8~ PAGE ~ ` ~
~ . -