Peevyhouse v. Garland Coal & Mining Co. — Quick Summary

Peevyhouse v. Garland Coal & Mining Co.

382 P.2d 109 (Okla. 1963)

In Brief

The case of Peevyhouse v. Garland Coal & Mining Co.

Key Issue

What is the proper measure of damages when a contractor fails to perform certain provisions of a contract and substantial discrepancy exists between cost of performance and consequent property value increase?

The Rule

The measure of damages for breach of contract is the reasonable cost of performance unless the cost is grossly disproportionate to the diminution in property value resulting from non-performance, in which case the damages are limited to the diminution in value.

Bottom Line

The court held that the appropriate measure of damages was the diminution in the value of the property, amounting to $300, rather than the $29,000 cost of performance, as the latter would constitute economic waste.

Why It Matters

Peevyhouse v. Garland Coal & Mining Co. is a touchstone in contract law curriculum, particularly regarding the doctrine of economic waste. It exemplifies judicial reluctance to impose damages that lead to economically inefficient outcomes. The ruling influences subsequent decisions by guiding courts to consider practicality and fairness in damage awards. This case remains a critical teaching tool, illustrating the tension between literal contract enforcement and economic rationality, solidifying its place as a keystone case demonstrating balance between juridical principles and operational efficiency.

Master More Contracts Cases with Briefly

Get AI-powered case briefs, practice questions, and study tools to excel in your law studies.