Also known as: duties to mitigate damages · mitigate damages · mitigating damages · mitigation of damages · avoidable consequences doctrine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A limitation on recoverable damages that prevents an injured party from obtaining compensation for losses that reasonable efforts after the breach or tort would have avoided. The rule requires the plaintiff to take ordinary steps to reduce harm but does not demand heroic measures or acceptance of inferior substitutes.
Dominic Drake's negligent driving damaged Destiny Davis's fence but also cleared an invasive vine that had been destroying her garden. When calculating damages the court subtracts the value of the cleared vine from the fence repair cost because the tortious act conferred a special benefit on the same interest harmed.
After Darrell Duncan vacated his apartment six months early, the landlord left the unit vacant for the remainder of the term and sued for full rent. The court reduced the award by the amount the landlord could have obtained through reasonable efforts to find a new tenant.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Doris Duffy abandoned her commercial lease. The landlord refused a commercially reasonable substitute tenant offered by Duffy and continued to demand full rent. The court held that the landlord's refusal violated the duty to mitigate and limited recovery to the difference between the original rent and the rent the substitute would have paid.
After developing lung disease from smoking, David Dawson declined the defendant's offer of free, low-risk cessation support and monitoring. The court refused to award damages for the worsened condition that the offered treatment would likely have prevented.
Bose Corp. sued over a false product review. The reviewer declined a prompt opportunity to correct the error before publication. The court reduced the damages award by the portion of harm that the correction would have avoided.
Demetrius Douglas contracted to pave a lot. After the owner repudiated, Douglas halted further work rather than continuing and incurring additional costs. The court awarded only the expenses incurred before the repudiation because continuing would have increased damages unnecessarily.
No. When parties agree to a valid liquidated sum payable upon breach, the non-breaching party has no duty to mitigate damages. The agreed amount replaces the usual damages calculation and the mitigation rule does not operate.
Supporting sources
The plaintiff may still recover for the original injury and any harm that reasonable efforts could not have prevented. Recovery is denied only for the additional harm that reasonable post-injury conduct would have avoided.
Supporting sources
In jurisdictions that impose the duty, the landlord must make reasonable efforts to relet. Failure to do so limits recovery to the rents that could not have been avoided by reasonable reletting efforts.
Supporting sources
No. The plaintiff need only take steps that are reasonable under the circumstances. An injured employee need not accept a demotion or demeaning position, and a tort plaintiff need not undergo risky or extraordinary measures.
Supporting sources
…granted certification in these cases to consider whether a landlord seeking damages from a defaulting tenant is under a duty to mitigate damages by making reasonable efforts to re-let an apartment wrongfully vacated by the tenant. Separate parts of the Appellate Division held that, in accordance with their respective leases, the…