Contract:Damages will weigh into the consideration of whether to form a contract whether to perform one’s contractual duties* if remedies (damages) are less than thecost to breach, the parties are more likely to breach; and whether the non-breaching party will bring claims against the breaching party incourt *plaintiff is more likely to sue if remedies (damages) are more than the costs ofgoing to courtNon-breaching parties are not expected to profit from breach.Property law provides more robust protection of property than K lawTort makes people assume involuntary obligation, while K makes it possible tochoose your obligation, communicate that intention so that you are subject to a newobligation.Legal remediesExpectation (default,traditional) damages: put the non-breaching party back to aposition where she would be had the person not breached because the plaintiff has theburden to prove, the defendant can raise the issue that the amount is speculative.Either speculative or hardly calculable will make the rewarding of expectationdamages unlikely.Reliance damages: put the non-breaching party back to a position back to a positionbefore the contract was made. Awarded only if expectation is speculative.Liquidated Damages: damages agreed in advance when the K is formed (expectationsare not clear?)Equitable reliefRestitution (unusual): put the breaching party back to a position before the contractwas made; disgorgement of the the amount the breaching party has gained from the K.Specific performance: specifically do what you are expected to do (time is not theessence; the moment hasn’t passed), awarded only if money damages are inadequate.Personal services cannot be compelled because of the 5thamendment (court cannotmake natural person do anything)Negative injunction is possible: stop a person from doing somethingSullivan v. O’ Conner: This case is unusual because it uses both the reliance andexpectation doctrine, pain and suffering can be recovered in contract cases. (Inbusiness settings, one cannot recover for disappointment.) Most medical cases aregoverned by tort. Curtice Bro Co. v. Catts: The planters caused irreparable injury.In this case, while expectation damages may compensate the buyer, it will not beefficient down the road. Transaction costs (i.e. search costs for pairing planters withcanners) are high. It will have a negative impact on the proper function of the market.NIPSCO V. Carbon County: Specific performance is futile if it is inefficient in aneconomic sense. The breaching party will make less money if they continue toperform their contractual duties. Plaintiff does not really want specific performancebut want to gain the leverage to negotiate higher damages. Also, contract is bilateralso workers (also assuming risks of losing jobs while entering an employment K) whoare not parties to the K do not have interests in the case. Public interests aretechnically not calculated in K cases but they may weigh into the decision marginally.