Sullivan v. O’Connor
363
Facts: The plaintiff had two operations done on her nose by
the defendant. The plaintiff claimed
that the defendant had promised to “enhance her beauty and improve her
appearance”, and sued the defendant for breaking his promise. The jury awarded damages to the
plaintiff. The defendant appealed, while
the plaintiff waived her claim for expectancy damages.
Issue: Should the damages be based on reliance interest[1]?
Rule: Reliance damages should be granted when expectation
damages are seen as excessive (because, for example, the defendant was not
liable for negligence) but restitution damages are seen as insufficient
(because the agreement ought to be at least minimally enforced).
Analysis: The ruling seems to have been made at least partially
on policy grounds. The court does not
want to encourage “defensive medicine” by making it easy to sue for breach of
promise. On the other hand, the court
doesn’t want to make it so difficult to sue for breach of promise that patients
can only sue for malpractice (“there is fear that the public might be exposed
to the enticements of charlatans”).
Conclusion: The court found the jury instructions were appropriate
and affirmed the judgment.
[1] “The interest a nonbreaching party has in recovering costs stemming from that party's reliance on the performance of the contract.” – Black’s 7th