Harris v. Metropolitan Mall
Wisconsin Supreme Court
334 N.W.2d 519, 112 Wis. 2d 487 (1983)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
To obtain a tax benefit, James Harris (plaintiff) bought a shopping mall and leased the mall back to the seller, Metropolitan Mall (Metropolitan) (defendant). Metropolitan had the option to repurchase the mall in the future. Harris made a down payment of $388,100, which was intended to permit Metropolitan to complete interior work in the mall to attract retail tenants. Metropolitan materially breached the contract. Harris stopped making payments under the land contract, took possession of the mall, and continued to operate it until he sold it. Harris received $150,000, partly from the purchaser and partly from insurance proceeds from a fire in the mall. Harris sued Metropolitan for breach of contract, seeking restitution, unpaid rent, and out-of-pocket expenses. Metropolitan argued that because Harris had received significant tax benefits from the contract, restitution was inappropriate. The trial court held that Harris was entitled to benefit-of-the-bargain damages in the amount of $159,000 offset by the $150,000 he received from the sale. Harris appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Day, J.)
Dissent (Callow, J.)
Dissent (Abrahamson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 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.
