Moorcroft v. Severance (2018)

Citation: Moorcroft v. Severance (2018)
Parent Document: Moorcroft v. Severance (2018)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2018-03-12
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10026703/moorcroft-v-severance/ ↗

Full Text

1,301 chars

The court thus declines to order an equitable ejectment of the Severances from the
Subject Property. While the court finds Mr. Moorcroft could seek an accounting and order for
back payment of taxes, the court declines that at this time for two reasons. First Mr. Moorcroft
did not seek such a remedy in his current amended complaint. Second, he has provided
insufficient evidence for the court to make any findings on the sum of the taxes currently unpaid
by the Severances. In any equitable damage accounting, while the court can order payments of
sums and enter judgements to require such payments, in doing so the court must determine the
sums due. To obtain a damage award a party must provide sufficient evidence to allow the fact
finder to estimate damages with “reasonable certainty.” Lemnah v. American Breeders Serv.,
Inc., 144 Vt. 568, 580 (1984); Madowitz v. Woods at Killington Owners’ Ass’n, Inc., 2014 VT
21, ¶ 14, 196 Vt. 47. See Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 352 (1981) (“Damages are not
recoverable for loss beyond an amount that the evidence permits to be established with
reasonable certainty.”). Damages cannot be based on mere “speculation and conjecture.”
Pinewood Manor, Inc. v. Vt. Agency of Transp., 164 Vt. 312, 318 (1995). 3. Count 3 – Anticipatory Breach of the Lease

Other Sections in This Document (73)

Full Text