Barrie School v. Patch
Maryland Court of Appeals
933 A.2d 382 (2007)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Andrew and Pamela Patch (defendants) enrolled their daughter in the Barrie School (the school) (plaintiff), a private Montessori school, for the 2004–2005 academic year. The parties entered into a re-enrollment agreement (the agreement) that required the Patches pay a $1,000 nonrefundable deposit and to notify the school in writing by May 31, 2004, if they intended to withdraw their daughter before the end of the school year. If the Patches notified the school after that date, they agreed to pay the remaining tuition balance of $13,490 pursuant to a liquidated-damages clause. On July 14, 2004, the Patches withdrew their daughter, refused to pay the liquidated-damages amount, and demanded the return of their $1,000 deposit. The school filed suit against the Patches for breach of contract and sought the remaining tuition balance for the academic year plus 12 percent interest and attorney’s fees. The Patches filed a counterclaim and sought the return of their $1,000 deposit. At trial, the court held that the liquidated-damages clause in the agreement was valid and legally enforceable but that the school did nothing to mitigate its damages. The court ruled in favor of the Patches, and the school appealed. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s judgment, and the Maryland Court of Appeals granted certiorari to review.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Raker, J.)
Dissent (Bell, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 829,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.