Also known as:duty to mitigate · mitigation duty · mitigate damages · mitigation of damages · duty to mitigate damages
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An obligation requiring an injured party to take reasonable steps to reduce the damages resulting from another's breach or tortious conduct. The injured party may not recover for losses that could have been avoided without undue risk, burden, or humiliation. Recovery remains available for losses that persist despite reasonable but unsuccessful mitigation efforts.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Tort Benefit Offsets Harm
Dominion Capital's negligent excavation caused flooding that damaged Dwight Dorsey's warehouse. Dorsey failed to take reasonable steps to divert water or protect stored goods after learning of the flooding. The court reduces the award for losses that Dorsey could have avoided by reasonable mitigation efforts.
Subcontractor Bids on Reliance
Duffy Construction relied on Star Paving's bid when submitting its own prime contract offer. After Duffy won the job, Star refused to perform at the quoted price. Duffy hired a replacement at a higher cost. The court awards the difference because Duffy had no reasonable opportunity to mitigate further once the bid was withdrawn.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Uniform Acts
Restatements
Study Supplements
Drennan v. Star Paving Co.51 Cal. 2d 409, 333 P.2d 757 (1958)
Employee Seeks New Position
Denise Donovan was terminated without cause by Interactive Data Corp. She immediately registered with three employment agencies and applied to comparable firms in her field. After six months she accepted a lower-paying role. The court limits her back-pay award to the period before she secured substitute employment.
Foley v. Interactive Data Corp.47 Cal. 3d 654, 254 Cal. Rptr. 211, 765 P.2d 373
Actress Rejects Comparable Role
Danielle Dixon's studio canceled her lead role in a musical film. The studio offered her the female lead in a different musical with similar compensation and shooting schedule. Dixon declined because the new script contained fewer songs. The court bars recovery of the full contract price because the substitute role was substantially comparable.
Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.3 Cal.3d 176, 474 P.2d 689
Smoker Continues Despite Warnings
Derek Douglas smoked cigarettes manufactured by Liggett Group for decades after package warnings appeared. He later developed lung cancer. The court reduces his damages award because his continued smoking after receiving clear risk information constituted a failure to mitigate.
Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.893 F.2d 541 (3d Cir.1990), affirmed in part and reversed in part, 505 U.S. 504 (1992)
Buyer Accepts Partial Shipment
Dillon Energy ordered custom metal parts from Wisconsin Knife Works. After partial delivery, Dillon repudiated the remaining orders. Wisconsin Knife Works halted further production. The court awards damages only for the delivered goods because Wisconsin Knife Works reasonably stopped incurring additional manufacturing costs.
Wisconsin Knife Works v. National Metal Crafters781 F.2d 1285, 1286
Common questions
Frequently Asked
4
Does the duty of mitigation require the injured party to accept any substitute performance offered?+
No. The injured party need only accept substitutes that are substantially comparable and that do not impose undue burden or humiliation. Rejection of a materially different offer does not violate the duty.
Supporting sources
When does the duty of mitigation arise in a contract dispute?+
The duty arises once the injured party learns of the breach or repudiation. Reasonable steps must then be taken to avoid losses that could be prevented without undue risk or expense.
Supporting sources
Can a landlord recover full rent after a tenant abandons the premises?+
Under the cited uniform act the landlord must make reasonable efforts to relet the unit. Any rent obtained reduces the tenant's liability for the shortfall.
Supporting sources
Does failure to mitigate completely bar recovery?+
No. Failure to mitigate reduces the damages award by the amount of loss that could have been avoided. The injured party may still recover for unavoidable losses.
Supporting sources
893 F.2d 541 (3d Cir. 1990), aff'd in part and rev'd in part, 505 U.S. 504 (1992)Torts
…would not proximately result from the breach of warranty."), and traditional contract principles, under which a buyer has a duty to mitigate damages and cannot recover for damages that she "could have avoided without undue risk, expense or humiliation," Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 350(1) (1965). Other courts have noticed the…