Legal Opinion
American Capital Corp. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided February 27, 2004No. 95-523CPublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION REGARDING PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO DAMAGES
BRADEN, Judge.
Justice Holmes observed, “[W]hen people make contracts, they usually contemplate the performance rather than the breach.” Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Common Law 302 (1881). Accordingly, when a breach does occur, the law allows the courts to award damages to encourage promisees to rely on promisors and thereby shift reasonable business risks to the party promising performance.
Our system of contract remedies is not directed at compulsion of promisors to prevent breach; it is aimed, instead, at relief to promisees to…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Arizonans for Official English v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Franconia Associates v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- American Capital Corporation v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Stovall v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
- Caroline Hunt Trust Estate v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Old Stone Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.