{"id":11508,"date":"2017-12-25T00:39:08","date_gmt":"2017-12-25T00:39:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=11508"},"modified":"2018-03-22T16:25:00","modified_gmt":"2018-03-22T16:25:00","slug":"breach-of-contract","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=11508","title":{"rendered":"breach of contract – violation of a contractual obligation, or interfering with another party\u2019s performance"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 This page is continued from the Civil Law Self-Help Walkthrough<\/a> >>>> Section 1; Torts, Breaches of Contract, and Assessing Liability<\/a>:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

****************************<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Besides torts<\/a>, civil suits can also be filed in cases of contract breaches.\u00a0 Also see our section on <\/strong><\/span>contracts and <\/strong><\/span>types of contracts.<\/span><\/strong><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

breach of contract<\/span>:<\/span><\/strong><\/span>
\n ( 17c)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

1. Violation of a contractual obligation by failing to perform one\u2019s own promise, by repudiating it, or by interfering with another party\u2019s performance. <\/span><\/strong>[1]<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

1. A failure without legal excuse to perform any promise which forms a whole or a part of a contract, including the refusal of a party to recognize the existence of the contract or the doing of something inconsistent with its existence.\u00a0 National City Bank v Erskine & Sons<\/em>, 158 Ohio St 450, 49 Ohio Ops 395, 110 NE2d, 598<\/span>; a nonperformance of any contractual duty or immediate performance; the breach may be total or partial, and may take place by failure to perform acts promised, by prevention, or hindrance, or by repudiation. Restatement; Contracts \u00a7 312<\/span>.<\/strong> [2]<\/span><\/p>\n

1. Failure, without legal excuse, to perform any promise that forms a whole or a part of a contract, including the doing of something inconsistent with its terms.<\/strong> [3]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Excerpt from Grover Cleveland Grismore’s<\/span> Principles of the Law of Contracts<\/em><\/a> (John Edward Murray Jr. ed.; 1965):<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201c<\/span>It is a rule, generally accepted, that when a promisor fails in any respect to carry out an existing duty calling for a present, immediate performance under a contract<\/a>, he is guilty of a breach of contract which furnishes a basis for a cause of action of some sort.\u00a0 This is so, whether the present duty of performance which has been violated comprises the whole duty or only an infinitesimal part of what will ultimately be due, and whether or not any loss has been caused by such failure to perform as has occurred.\u00a0 As to these matters there is no cause for doubt.\u00a0 The questions of difficulty in this connection grow out of three related matters.\u00a0 These questions are:<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

(1) whether a cause of action ever exists when, as yet, there has been no failure to carry out an immediate duty of present performance;
\n(2) what kind of relief is available when a cause of action admittedly exists; and
\n(3) whether, when the contract is one in which the performance called for by its terms is not to be rendered all at once, <\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

a partial though substantial breach is, for purposes of remedy, to be treated as the equivalent of <\/span>a breach of the whole contract, thus giving the promisee, <\/span>if he elects to sue for damages for breach of contract, the<\/span>\u00a0right to recover, in one action, prospective as well as actual<\/span><\/strong><\/span>\u00a0losses; or whether each new failure to perform, as the later performances come due, is to be treated as the basis of a new and distinct cause of action.<\/span>\u201d<\/strong> [2]<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Excerpt from Restatement (Second) of Contracts<\/a> 5 236 cmt. a (1979):<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cA breach may be one by non-performance, or by repudiation, or by both.\u00a0 Every breach gives rise to a claim for damages, and may give rise to other remedies. Even if the injured party sustains no pecuniary loss or is unable to show such loss with sufficient certainty, he has at least a claim for nominal damages.\u00a0 If a court chooses to ignore a trifling departure, there is no breach and no claim arises.<\/span>\u201d<\/strong> [4]<\/span><\/p>\n

active breach of contract<\/span>:<\/span><\/strong><\/span> (1840) Civil law<\/em>. <\/span>The negligent performance of a contractual obligation, to the point of acting outside the contract\u2019s terms.\u00a0 *\u00a0 Under Louisiana law before 1984, active breach of contract was contrasted with passive breach of contract, which was a failure to perform the obligations created by the contract.\u00a0 Unlike a passive breach, an active breach of contract could give rise to a claim in<\/span> contract<\/a> and in<\/span> tort<\/a>.\u00a0 The distinction was abolished in 1984.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

immediate breach<\/a>:<\/span><\/strong><\/span> (1820) A breach that entitles the nonbreaching party to sue for damages immediately.<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n