He then filed suit, claiming that he was entitled to conduct the laundry operations for an additional forty-seven months and that through such operations
| ♥ 0 |
Copenhaver, the owner of a laundry business, contracted with Berryman, the owner of a large apartment complex, to allow Copenhaver to own and operate the laundry facilities within the apartment complex. Berryman subsequently terminated the five-year contract with Copenhaver with forty-seven months remaining. Within six months, Copenhaver placed the equipment into use in other locations and generated at least as much income as he would have earned at Berryman’s apartment complex. He then filed suit, claiming that he was entitled to conduct the laundry operations for an additional forty-seven months and that through such operations he would have earned a profit of $13,886.58 after deducting Berryman’s share of the gross receipts and other operating expenses. Decision? |
Explanation
Individual B is not going to be entitled to pay any kind of damages beyond six months due to the termination of the terms of the contract. This is because after six months, Individual C has placed the equipment for conducting laundry operation at another location, outside Individual B's apartment complex. Individual C is going to be eligible to get only six months of damages.
The 47-months' damages of $13,886.58 are not going to be entertained because Individual C did not claim them at the time of the termination of the contract by Individual B.
Verified Answer
Individual C is not going to be eligible to claim any damages for the next 47 months minus 6 months. This is because after six months, Individual C has started to earn a balanced income, equal to what Individual C was making at Individual B's apartment complex, by installing laundry tools at other places.So, losses can only be claimed for the six months wherein there were no operations.
