Also known as: mitigation of damages · mitigate damages · mitigated damages · mitigating damages · avoidable consequences doctrine · duty to mitigate
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
A principle requiring a plaintiff, after an injury or breach of contract, to make reasonable efforts to alleviate the effects of the injury or breach. If the defendant shows that the plaintiff failed to mitigate damages, the plaintiff's recovery may be reduced.
A principle requiring a plaintiff, after an injury or breach of contract, to make reasonable efforts to alleviate the effects of the injury or breach. If the defendant shows that the plaintiff failed to mitigate damages, the plaintiff's recovery may be reduced.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
When the defendant's tortious conduct confers a special benefit on the very interest harmed, the value of that benefit is credited against damages to the extent equity requires.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
When the defendant's tortious conduct confers a special benefit on the very interest harmed, the value of that benefit is credited against damages to the extent equity requires.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Mason McCarthy sued a tobacco company after developing lung disease from long-term smoking. After the verdict he accepted a desk job that eliminated exposure to workplace irritants and reduced his medical expenses. The defendant argued that Mason's failure to seek less strenuous work earlier should reduce the award for lost wages.
Melanie Morris published a critical product review that a manufacturer claimed was defamatory. After the suit was filed Melanie issued a clarification that corrected factual errors and reduced the scope of claimed reputational injury. The manufacturer contended that the clarification came too late to count as reasonable mitigation of damages.
Maurice Marshall contracted to pave a school lot but the school district repudiated before performance. Maurice immediately bid on three comparable municipal paving jobs and secured one within two weeks. The district argued that Maurice's recovery should be reduced by the profits he earned from the substitute contract.
Miles Montgomery was wrongfully terminated from Morgan Financial and remained unemployed for four months before accepting a similar analyst position at another firm. Morgan claimed that Miles could have found comparable work sooner and that his delay increased the damages. The court examined whether Miles's job search satisfied the duty to mitigate.
Mohan Malhotra was injured when his car collided with a vehicle manufactured by Magnolia Motors. Evidence showed that Mohan was not wearing the available seatbelt at the time of impact. Magnolia argued that Mohan's failure to use the seatbelt constituted a failure to mitigate damages that should reduce his recovery for enhanced injuries.
A plaintiff must make reasonable efforts to alleviate the effects of the injury or breach. Reasonable efforts include seeking substitute performance or employment and avoiding actions that increase loss. The standard is ordinary care under the circumstances.
Supporting sources
No. Failure to mitigate reduces the plaintiff's recovery by the amount of loss that could have been avoided. The plaintiff may still recover for losses that could not reasonably have been prevented.
Supporting sources
Yes. The principle requires reasonable efforts to reduce loss whether the claim arises from a tortious injury or a contractual breach. Courts apply the same avoidable-consequences analysis in both settings.
Supporting sources
Maria Morales's neighbor Mercury Industries negligently flooded her garden but the water also enriched the soil with minerals that boosted crop yields the next season. Maria sought full damages for the flooding. The court credited the value of the soil enrichment against her recovery because the same conduct that caused harm also conferred a special benefit to the damaged interest.
When the defendant's tortious conduct confers a special benefit on the very interest that was harmed, the value of that benefit is considered in mitigation to the extent equity requires. The credit prevents the plaintiff from receiving a windfall.
Supporting sources
…been undermined by the adoption in California of a rule that lessors — like all other contracting parties — have a duty to mitigate damages upon the lessee's abandonment of the property by seeking a substitute lessee. (See Civ. Code, § 1951.2.) (8) Furthermore, the values that go into the personal selection of a lessee are…