Contract Damages Calculator

Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 349 lets the breaching party prove that the non-breaching party would have suffered a loss under full performance ("the losing contract" rule) and reduce reliance recovery by that amount -- the Restatement's own commentary says the practical effect is that reliance recovery ends up matching expectation-based recovery in that scenario, so a plaintiff can never use the reliance theory to end up in a BETTER position than the contract itself was ever worth. This calculator approximates that ceiling as Full Contract Value, since it does not collect a party's own remaining cost of performance. Reliance Recovery Was Capped shows "Yes" whenever Reliance Costs minus Mitigation Savings exceeds Full Contract Value.

It is the missing "cost avoided" term from Restatement § 347's expectation-damages formula (loss in value + other loss − cost avoided − loss avoided): a party who no longer has to finish its own performance after a breach saves that cost, and the saved amount reduces Expectation Damages. Enter a nonzero value only if you are the party still owed performance -- typically a supplier or contractor who stopped work -- not if you are the party who still owes payment, since a buyer generally has no further "performance" cost to avoid.

Mitigation Savings is subtracted from both Expectation Damages and Reliance Damages independently, because the duty to mitigate avoidable losses applies under either theory -- a plaintiff generally cannot recover for harm they could have reasonably avoided. It has no effect on Restitution Damages, since that theory measures what the breaching party gained rather than what the other party lost or spent.

Expectation damages put the non-breaching party where full performance would have -- the benefit of the bargain. Reliance damages instead reimburse out-of-pocket costs spent relying on the contract, regardless of what the bargain itself was worth, but capped so they can't exceed what full performance would have been worth. Restitution damages return whatever benefit was conferred on the breaching party, based on preventing their unjust enrichment rather than compensating the other side's loss.

No -- Recommended Claim reflects the highest of three simplified, formulaic measures, but which theory actually applies, whether it can be pleaded in the alternative, and how a court would value each element depends on the specific facts, contract terms, and jurisdiction. This calculator is an illustration of the three doctrines, not legal advice; consult a licensed attorney before filing a claim.