United States Third Circuit

In this breach of contract action between plaintiff-racing company and defendant, its former sponsor, an award of $7 million in damages for defendant-sponsor's breach is affirmed, and the case is remanded for reconsideration of a damages provision that approves an additional $7 million in damages for loss of sponsorship for the 2011 racing season, where: 1) plaintiff did not have the burden of proof to show reasonable mitigation efforts; 2) reasonable mitigation is an affirmative defense, and the District Court therefore erred when it conducted a mitigation analysis given that defendant-sponsor did not plead the defense; and 3) the additional damage award for the 2011 season is not an unfair windfall, as the amount is not in excess of plaintiff's expectation interest.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/13/2014
• Published 08/13/2014

Judges

• BAYLSON

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel