Hawkins v. McGee

Last updated

Hawkins v. McGee
Seal of New Hampshire.svg
Court New Hampshire Supreme Court
DecidedJune 4, 1929 (1929-06-04)
Citation(s)84 N.H. 114, 146 A. 641 (N.H. 1929)
Keywords

Hawkins v. McGee, 84 N.H. 114, 146 A. 641 (N.H. 1929), [1] is a leading case on damages in contracts handed down by the New Hampshire Supreme Court. It has come to be known as the "Hairy Hand" case from the circumstances, because a subsequent decision uses the phrase.

Contents

This case is famous for its mention in the John Jay Osborn Jr. novel The Paper Chase and in the film version of that work, as well as its use in legal education. [2]

Background

George A. Hawkins' hand was scarred from contact with an electrical wire, after turning on the light in his family home's kitchen when he was 11 years old (1915). His father, Charles, was approached by Edward R. B. McGee, a local doctor in Berlin, New Hampshire, about having the scars removed. McGee guaranteed to make the injured hand a "one hundred percent good hand". McGee used a technique of "skin grafting" that he was unfamiliar with and failed to remove the scars. Because McGee used skin from Hawkins's chest area, the graft caused the palm of Hawkins' hand to grow thick hair.

Hawkins sued under a theory of breach of contract in 1926 and was paid for damages from the pain from the operation and the damage the operation had caused to his hand. The issue before the court was what type of damages should be awarded.

On appeal, the New Hampshire Supreme Court held that the amount of damages awarded should be equal to the difference between the value of what Hawkins was promised to receive—a "one hundred percent good hand"—and what he in fact received—a hairy palm—as well as any incidental losses he incurred as a result of the breach. This is known as expectation interest (or expectation damages), which attempts to put the plaintiff into a position where they would have been had the contract not been breached. The court made a point of dismissing the argument on damages for the pain and suffering because pain and suffering were an implicit part of the contract for surgery.

The case does not stand for the principle that expectation damages are the only proper measure of damages there are many other measures. Another, for example, would be the cost to fix the hand, and another would be the difference between what Hawkins got and what he had before. The court found only that this was the proper measure of damages in a case of this kind in New Hampshire.[ citation needed ]

Later use

This case has been a staple of casebooks on contract law for decades, and has come to be known as the "Hairy Hand Case" (or, sometimes, the "Case of the Hairy Hand") because the subsequent decision in McGee v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 53 F.2D 953 (1st Cir. 1931) uses the phrase. In that case, Doctor McGee sues his malpractice insurer for coverage of the damages awarded in the original lawsuit. The Hawkins family did not know of the case's prominence in contract casebooks until 1964 when Gail Hawkins encountered it in her first-year contracts class at Boston University School of Law. [3]

Professor Kingsfield refers to the "Hairy Hand" case in the opening scene of the popular movie The Paper Chase. Harvard contract law classes actually began with this lesson for many years (and frequently still do) as part of Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.'s theory that the study of contract law should begin with the remedies for a broken promise. The family did not learn about the case's use in The Paper Chase until Gail's mother, Edith, saw the movie during its first run in 1973. [3]

The 2018 film On the Basis of Sex also cites the case in a contract law class.

Related Research Articles

At common law, damages are a remedy in the form of a monetary award to be paid to a claimant as compensation for loss or injury. To warrant the award, the claimant must show that a breach of duty has caused foreseeable loss. To be recognised at law, the loss must involve damage to property, or mental or physical injury; pure economic loss is rarely recognised for the award of damages.

Punitive damages, or exemplary damages, are damages assessed in order to punish the defendant for outrageous conduct and/or to reform or deter the defendant and others from engaging in conduct similar to that which formed the basis of the lawsuit. Although the purpose of punitive damages is not to compensate the plaintiff, the plaintiff will receive all or some of the punitive damages in award.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Breach of contract</span> Type of civil wrong in contract law

Breach of contract is a legal cause of action and a type of civil wrong, in which a binding agreement or bargained-for exchange is not honored by one or more of the parties to the contract by non-performance or interference with the other party's performance. Breach occurs when a party to a contract fails to fulfill its obligation(s), whether partially or wholly, as described in the contract, or communicates an intent to fail the obligation or otherwise appears not to be able to perform its obligation under the contract. Where there is breach of contract, the resulting damages have to be paid to the aggrieved party by the party breaching the contract.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Specific performance</span> Equitable remedy in contract law

Specific performance is an equitable remedy in the law of contract, whereby a court issues an order requiring a party to perform a specific act, such as to complete performance of the contract. It is typically available in the sale of land law, but otherwise is not generally available if damages are an appropriate alternative. Specific performance is almost never available for contracts of personal service, although performance may also be ensured through the threat of proceedings for contempt of court.

A legal remedy, also referred to as judicial relief or a judicial remedy, is the means with which a court of law, usually in the exercise of civil law jurisdiction, enforces a right, imposes a penalty, or makes another court order to impose its will in order to compensate for the harm of a wrongful act inflicted upon an individual.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Misrepresentation</span> Untrue statement in contract negotiations

In common law jurisdictions, a misrepresentation is a false or misleading statement of fact made during negotiations by one party to another, the statement then inducing that other party to enter into a contract. The misled party may normally rescind the contract, and sometimes may be awarded damages as well.

Loss of chance in English law refers to a particular problem of causation, which arises in tort and contract. The law is invited to assess hypothetical outcomes, either affecting the claimant or a third party, where the defendant's breach of contract or of the duty of care for the purposes of negligence deprived the claimant of the opportunity to obtain a benefit and/or avoid a loss. For these purposes, the remedy of damages is normally intended to compensate for the claimant's loss of expectation. The general rule is that while a loss of chance is compensable when the chance was something promised on a contract it is not generally so in the law of tort, where most cases thus far have been concerned with medical negligence in the public health system.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Expectation damages</span>

Expectation damages are damages recoverable from a breach of contract by the non-breaching party. An award of expectation damages protects the injured party's interest in realising the value of the expectancy that was created by the promise of the other party. Thus, the impact of the breach on the promisee is to be effectively "undone" with the award of expectation damages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Efficient breach</span>

In legal theory, particularly in law and economics, efficient breach is a voluntary breach of contract and payment of damages by a party who concludes that they would incur greater economic loss by performing under the contract.

The casebook method, similar to but not exactly the same as the case method, is the primary method of teaching law in law schools in the United States. It was pioneered at Harvard Law School by Christopher Columbus Langdell. It is based on the principle that rather than studying highly abstract summaries of legal rules, the best way to learn American law is to read the actual judicial opinions which become the law under the rule of stare decisis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sale of Goods Act 1979</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which regulated English contract law and UK commercial law in respect of goods that are sold and bought. The Act consolidated the original Sale of Goods Act 1893 and subsequent legislation, which in turn had codified and consolidated the law. Since 1979, there have been numerous minor statutory amendments and additions to the 1979 act. It was replaced for some aspects of consumer contracts from 1 October 2015 by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 but remains the primary legislation underpinning business-to-business transactions involving selling or buying goods.

Reliance damages is the measure of compensation given to a person who suffered an economic harm for acting in reliance on a party who failed to fulfill their obligation. If the injured party could go back in time, they should be indifferent to entering into the contract that would be breached and receiving the reliance damages as opposed to not entering into any contract with the breaching party. The injured party should be put in a substantially similar situation position as they would have been had the contract not been entered into. This is different from expectation damages, where the injured party should be indifferent between the fulfillment of the contract and never having entered into the contract.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">English contract law</span> Law of contracts in England and Wales

English contract law is the body of law that regulates legally binding agreements in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth, from membership in the European Union, continuing membership in Unidroit, and to a lesser extent the United States. Any agreement that is enforceable in court is a contract. A contract is a voluntary obligation, contrasting to the duty to not violate others rights in tort or unjust enrichment. English law places a high value on ensuring people have truly consented to the deals that bind them in court, so long as they comply with statutory and human rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States contract law</span>

Contract law regulates the obligations established by agreement, whether express or implied, between private parties in the United States. The law of contracts varies from state to state; there is nationwide federal contract law in certain areas, such as contracts entered into pursuant to Federal Reclamation Law.

<i>Addis v Gramophone Co Ltd</i>

Addis v Gramophone Co Ltd [1909] AC 488 is an old English contract law and UK labour law case, which used to restrict damages for non-pecuniary losses for breach of contract.

<i>Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA</i>

Malik and Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA [1997] UKHL 23 is a leading English contract law and UK labour law case, which confirmed the existence of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in all contracts of employment.

McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission, is an Australian contract law case, relevant for English contract law, concerning the common mistake about the possibility of performing an agreement.

Johnson v Unisys Limited [2001] UKHL 13 is a leading UK labour law case on the measure of damages for unfair dismissal and the nature of the contract of employment.

<i>Rigby v Ferodo Ltd</i> 1988 UK labour law case

Rigby v Ferodo Ltd [1988] ICR 29 is a UK labour law case concerning the contract of employment. It held that if an employer reduces wages without a worker's consent, the worker may continue to work and claim the shortfall.

References

  1. Case summary
  2. E. Allen Farnsworth, William F. Young, Carol Sanger, Contracts: Cases and Materials, Sixth Edition (Foundation Press, 2001) p. 127, note b (stating that the case "became part of modern contract lore as a result of John Osborne's book and the subsequent movie The Paper Chase..."
  3. 1 2 Fuller, Lon L.; Melvin Aron Eisenberg (2006). Basic Contract Law (8th ed.). St. Paul, Minn.: Thomson/West. pp.  190–197. ISBN   0-314-15901-0.