Tuesday, December 3, 2013

Goodman v. Dicker case brief

Goodman v. Dicker case brief summary
169 F.2d 684 (D.C. Cir. 1948)


CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellants sought review of a United States District Court of the District of Columbia judgment that they were estopped from denying a contract existed and were responsible for appellees' detrimental reliance.

CASE FACTS
Appellees sued appellants for breach of contract. The trial court found appellants, by their representations and conduct, induced appellees to incur expenses in preparing for business under a franchise that was never granted. The trial court held even though no contract had been proven, appellants were estopped from denying one existed, and judgment was entered for appellees for the amount covering their cash outlays and anticipated profits from the sale of radios. Appellants sought review of the decision.

DISCUSSION

  • The reviewing court held that justice and fair dealing required appellees' detrimental reliance should be protected from conduct of the kind revealed here and that appellants, who brought about the situation, should be estopped from denying a contract existed. 
  • The reviewing court, however, modified the district court judgment to include only the loss sustained by expenditures made in reliance on the assurance of appellants and reduced judgment by subtracting from it the loss of anticipated profits.

CONCLUSION
Judgment that appellants estopped from denying that a contract existed affirmed. However, the court modified damage judgment to include only the loss sustained by expenditures made in reliance on the assurance of the franchise dealer, not the anticipated loss of profits on the sale of the radios.


Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Contract Law

Shop for Law School Course Materials.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.