ADVERTISEMENT



Google       
Call (866) 635-2689 for a free Personal Injury evaluation by attorney in your area.

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Personal Injury Law Blogs -> Day on Torts

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Personal Injury Law

: Day on Torts

Leading Tennessee Tort Cases - Damages - Benefit of the Bargain Rule

By John Day

ADVERTISEMENTS

This is one of a series of posts that will excerpt sections from the third edition of my book, Day on Torts: Leading Tennessee Tort Cases.  To order the book go here.

§ 23.2     Benefit of the Bargain Rule

The Case: Haynes v. Cumberland Builders, Inc., 546 S.W.2d 228 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1976).

The Basic Facts: Plaintiff alleged that he was injured as a result of defendant's fraudulent misrepresentation in a land sales transaction.

The Bottom Line:

  • 'In an action for damages caused by a fraudulent misrepresentation, the proper measure of the plaintiffs' general damages is the benefit of the bargain rule. Ford Motor Co. v. Lonon, [398 S.W.2d 240 (Tenn. 1966)]; Shwab v. Walters, supra; Augur v. Smith, [18 S.W. 398 (Tenn. 1891)] and Hogg v. Cardwell, 36 Tenn. 151 (1856). This measure of damages allows the plaintiff to recover the difference between the actual value of the property be received at the time of the making of the contract and the value that the property would have possessed if Appleton's representations had been true. 37 Am.Jur.2d, Fraud and Deceit, § 353, p. 473 (1968); see Shwab v. Walters, supra; 13 A.L.R.3d, Damages--Fraudulent Representation, § 3, p. 885 (1967). The application of this measure of damages compels the defendant to make good on the false representations. The measure of damages and the fixing of the value of the property are to be determined as of the time of the transaction. 37 Am.Jur.2d, § 365, p. 495 (1968); 13 A.L.R.3d, §§ 2--3, pp. 882--902 (1967); McCormick on Damages, § 122, pp. 456--457 (1935).' 546 S.W.2d at 233.
  • 'The plaintiff has the burden of proving both values applied in the formula which measures his general damages, the actual value of the property at the time of the contract and the value of the property if it had been as it was represented to him. In a land sale transaction, the contract price is strong evidence of what would have been the value of the land had it been as represented. 37 Am.Jur.2d, § 353, p. 476; see 13 A.L.R.3d, § 2, pp. 882--884 (1967).' Id.  at 233-34.

Other Sources of Note: Rose v. City of Covington, 634 S.W.2d 268 (Tenn. 1982) (same rule applies in cases of negligent representation, and also includes 'incidental' damages; 'incidental' damages are not defined).

Full post as published by Day on Torts on December 01, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0205 secs (new cache)