Legal Opinion · Dissent

Columbia Park Golf Course, Inc. v. City of Kennewick

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided February 10, 2011No. 28357-7-IIIPublished

1Dissent

¶58 (dissenting) — The courts of this state have not yet determined when parties can enter into an agreement that contemplates an additional future agreement, let alone the proper standard for awarding damages for breach of such agreements. Like the majority, I conclude that contracts that imply future negotiation will take place are valid. However, I would hold that only reliance damages are recoverable in cases of breach of those contracts. Expectation damages are too speculative to be awarded in this case and are inconsistent with Washington’s “new business rule.”

Korsmo, A.C. J.

Contracts…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Industrial Indem. Co. of Northwest, Inc. v. KallevigWashington Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Badgett v. Security State BankWashington Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Keystone Land & Development Co. v. Xerox Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Anderson v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  5. Anderson v. State Farm Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API