California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Dubarry Internat., Inc. v. Southwest Forest Industries, Inc., 231 Cal.App.3d 552, 282 Cal.Rptr. 181 (Cal. App. 1991):
That DuBarry based his case on two separate causes of action does not necessarily mean that he was entitled to receive a separate damage award for each. " 'If a given state of facts entitles one to recover damages upon the theory of tort, and the same state of facts entitles him to recover upon the theory of contract, it would seem plain that recovery could not be twice had simply because the facts would support recovery upon either theory.' " (Shell v. Schmidt (1954) 126 Cal.App.2d 279, 291, 272 P.2d 82, quoting from 2 Freeman on Judgments (5th ed.1925), 583, page 1235.) We do not quarrel with the proposition that DuBarry might, in some circumstances, be entitled to recover separate damages on his two causes of action. They do involve, after all, alleged invasions of different rights. However, in this case the only damage evidence offered related to lost commissions. There was no attempt to show that Southwest's alleged bad faith denial of the agency contract's existence had caused DuBarry any damages beyond those already claimed for the breach of that contract. 13 Obviously, the jury itself recognized this problem. During deliberations it submitted the following question to the court:
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.