Select Page

Remedies
West Virginia University School of Law
Roberts, Caprice L.

REMEDIES OUTLINE
Caprice Roberts – Spring 2005
 
 
 
 
CHAPTER 1
 
A. INTRODUCTION
 
B. TORT REMEDIAL GOALS
 
C. REMEDIAL GOALS IN CONTRACT BREACHES
 
D. REMEDIAL GOALS FOR UNJUST ENRICHMENT
 
E. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF MODERN REMEDIES
            1. Accommodation of Remedial Goals w/in the c/l system: a summary of c/l                           actions
                        a. torts-property
                        b. contract damages
                        c. unjust enrichment and restitution
                        d. conclusion
            2. The History and Development of the Chancery Court
 
 
CHAPTER 2 – MODERN DAMAGES
 
A. THE NATURE OF LEGAL DAMAGES
 
            Gavcus v. Potts
            “Trespass and unlawful removal of coins”
 
Facts: Stolen coins worth 150K. The coins were returned via a criminal statute on the books. She has no claim to damage to property. She has a trespass (intentional torts) suit. The case is about the security system and attorneys fees. There was no physical damage. There is no question the person is liable. There has already been adjudication. The cases should settle. The jury awarded money for locks and attorneys fees. She was awarded punitive damages. The judge sets the verdict aside.
 
To get money for locks, she would have to prove that the trespass caused distress. There was no proof of distress. Even if she did, there was no precedent to pay for locks in this jurisdiction. She can make a claim for emotional harm and would be reasonable foreseeable. 
 
Attorneys Fees: She is claiming that as a result of this conduct, I had to go thru another lawsuit. There are requirements that the lawsuit is with a third party.   The other lawsuit was not involving different parties. The lawsuit was not because of the tortuous action. 
 
·      Π can

ticals, Inc. v. Broudo
                        “MUST PROVE ECONOMIC LOSS FOR SECURITIES FRAUD”
 
Facts: Dura has an asthmatic spray device. A public company has to make statements about the company. There were potential misrepresentations. The plaintiffs allege that the misrepresentations caused them economic loss. It was not stated with particularity. The Supreme Court says that the complaint is not good enough. The fraud must be connected to the loss.
 
Action must include basic elements:
1. A material representation
2. Scienter
3. a connection with the purchase or sale of a security
4. reliance, often referred to in cases involving public securities markets as transaction causation
5. economic loss
6. loss causation