Runyan v. Pacific Air Industries, Inc.
California Supreme Court
466 P.2d 682 (1970)
Runyan (plaintiff) worked for Tidewater Oil Company. Runyan quit his job with Tidewater based on a contract he signed with Pacific Air Industries, Inc. (defendant), under which Runyan would own and operate a local Pacific franchise. Runyan paid Pacific $25,000 for the franchise. Pacific breached the terms of the franchise agreement by failing to properly maintain and supply Runyan’s local office. Runyan rescinded the contract and brought suit. The trial court awarded Runyan the $25,000 payment plus over $5,000 in consequential damages due to Runyan’s loss of income. These consequential damages were based on Runyan’s salary at Tidewater that he forewent when he signed the agreement with Pacific. Pacific appealed the award of consequential damages.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Sullivan, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 723,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 723,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,500 briefs, keyed to 983 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.