P decided to hold a fund-raising drive. D conducted a survey and informed Pl that it was feasible to raise $325,000 - $350,000 for the project. The Council thereupon set its goal at $345,000 and selected P to assist. P and D entered a contract where D was to provide professional assistance to help P reach its goal in return for a fee of $28,000; D did not guarantee that any money would be raised. The drive grossed $88,842.32; P paid $24,000 to D and incurred $10,000 in additional expenses. The campaign fell far short of its goal, and P sued seeking damages. The District Court submitted the damage issue to the jury only upon the theory of lost profits: 'what the plaintiff would have made if the contract had been performed minus a deduction for savings made possible by the breach.' P sought $399,000 from D. The jury awarded P $35,000.00. D appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.