Legal Opinion
Lee v. Foote
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 29, 1984No. 83-574PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Per curiam
Appellant appeals the trial court’s denial of compensatory damages upon its finding that appellee breached an oral contract for the exchange of services. The trial court awarded appellant only nominal damages of one dollar, ruling that, as a matter of law, he could not recover for the value of services he performed for appellee. We reverse and remand.
I
The trial court, sitting without a jury, found that Lee and Foote entered into an oral contract for the exchange of services. Lee agreed to perform rough and finished carpentry work on Foote’s house at 1926 Eleventh Street, N.W., and Foote…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Cobb v. Standard Drug Co., Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Edmund J. Flynn Co. v. LaVayDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981
- United States Ex Rel. Susi Contracting Co. v. Zara Contracting Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Oliver v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Ingber v. RossDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Pérez Marrero v. Colegio de Cirujanos Dentistas de Puerto RicoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1992
- Carter-Obayuwana v. Howard UniversityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- Matter of RobertsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Harrington v. TrotmanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Curtis v. GordonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.