Moore v. John E. Blomquist, Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Moore v. John E. Blomquist, Inc.

256 N.W.2d 518, 1977 Minn. LEXIS 1497

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedJuly 15, 1977

Docket46787

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 256 N.W.2d 518 (Moore v. John E. Blomquist, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Moore v. John E. Blomquist, Inc., 256 N.W.2d 518, 1977 Minn. LEXIS 1497 (Mich. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant corporation, through its defendant agents and employees, agreed to rent an apartment to plaintiff, Karen Lou Moore, on a month-to-month tenancy and accepted plaintiff’s downpayment. Defendants thereafter breached the contract by renting the premises to another person, who entered into occupancy of the apartment. Defendants refunded to plaintiff her deposit.

The trial court, upon its finding of breach of contract, awarded plaintiff $125 in compensatory damages, which is not challenged on this appeal. The trial court, in addition, found that defendants had acted with malice in that they “callously and willfully violated the plaintiff’s rights to the benefit of her rental agreement.” Based upon this finding, the court awarded plaintiff punitive damages in the sum of $500. Wild v. Rarig, 302 Minn. 419, 442, 234 N.W.2d 775, 790 (1975), rejecting a claim for punitive damages based upon bad-faith termination of a contract, held:

“ * * * A malicious or bad-faith motive in breaching a contract does not convert a contract action into a tort action. Accordingly, we think that bad-faith termination of contract is not an independent tort of the kind that will permit a tort recovery.”

We accordingly reverse so much of the judgment as awards punitive damages but disallow attorneys fees, costs, or disbursements to either party.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Defendant corporation, through its defendant agents and employees, agreed to rent an apartment to plaintiff, Karen Lou Moore, on a month-to-month tenancy and accepted plaintiff’s downpayment. Defendants thereafter breached the contract by renting the premises to another person, who entered into occupancy of the apartment. Defendants refunded to plaintiff her deposit.

The trial court, upon its finding of breach of contract, awarded plaintiff $125 in compensatory damages, which is not challenged on this appeal. The trial court, in addition, found that defendants had acted with malice in that they “callously and willfully violated the plaintiff’s rights to the benefit of her rental agreement.” Based upon this finding, the court awarded plaintiff punitive damages in the sum of $500. Wild v. Rarig, 302 Minn. 419, 442, 234 N.W.2d 775, 790 (1975), rejecting a claim for punitive damages based upon bad-faith termination of a contract, held:

“ * * * A malicious or bad-faith motive in breaching a contract does not convert a contract action into a tort action. Accordingly, we think that bad-faith termination of contract is not an independent tort of the kind that will permit a tort recovery.”

We accordingly reverse so much of the judgment as awards punitive damages but disallow attorneys fees, costs, or disbursements to either party.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 N.W.2d 518, 1977 Minn. LEXIS 1497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-john-e-blomquist-inc-minn-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack