Also known as: reasonable-certainty test · reasonable certainty
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard requiring that essential terms, identifications, or losses be shown through evidence that removes undue speculation. The standard ensures enforcement or recovery rests on a factual basis sufficient to define obligations or quantify harm without conjecture.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Union Insurance sent Lindsay a signed one-page document listing only total premium and aggregate limit for coastal policies. The writing supplied no attachment points, per-policy limits, deductibles, exclusions, or county descriptions. Lindsay accepted by email the next day. When Union later refused performance, the court examined whether the document stated the unperformed promises with enough clarity to satisfy the memorandum requirement.
Testator's will directed that a separate list of personal property be distributed according to its terms. The list existed at execution and the will expressly referenced it by title and date. The court reviewed whether the will and list together identified the incorporated writing and its contents with sufficient clarity to permit probate as part of the will.
A complaint described the perpetrator only as a tall man in a red jacket seen fleeing the scene. Officers sought a warrant using that description. The magistrate examined whether the description supplied enough detail to identify the correct individual with the required clarity before authorizing arrest.
Seller misrepresented the capacity of specialized molding dies to buyer. After the sale, buyer proved the misrepresentation and sought damages measured by the benefit of the bargain. The court required buyer to establish the amount of lost profits from inability to fulfill production contracts with evidence that removed undue speculation.
Buyer paid deposits and incurred preparation costs for five refrigerated trailers that seller failed to deliver on time. Buyer sought recovery of those expenditures as reliance damages. Seller attempted to reduce the award by proving buyer would have suffered a net loss even if performance had occurred. The court examined whether seller's proof of that hypothetical loss met the required evidentiary threshold.
Grocer proved seller delivered defective refrigerated trailers two weeks late, causing spoilage and loss of a national supply contract. Grocer sought damages for projected profits on that contract and future expansion. The court required grocer to present evidence of those profits that removed undue speculation before any recovery would be allowed.
The writing must state the essential terms of the unperformed promises with enough clarity that a court can determine the parties' obligations without conjecture. Omitted details such as attachment points, limits, or geographic scope render the memorandum insufficient when those terms control the scope of performance.
Supporting sources
…benefit from it"). If retroactive laws change the legal consequences of transactions long closed, the change can destroy the reasonable certainty and security which are the very objects of property ownership. As a consequence, due process protection for property must be understood to incorporate our settled tradition against…
…compensation for the loss of his or her bargain — that is, losses necessarily following from the breach which are proven to a
A party may recover lost profits only when the evidence permits the amount to be established without undue speculation. Projections based solely on new ventures or competitor data, without the plaintiff's own historical track record, ordinarily fail the standard.
Supporting sources
Yes. When a party seeks recovery of expenditures made in reliance, the breaching party may offset that amount by proving any loss the injured party would have suffered had the contract been performed, provided that offset is shown with reasonable certainty.
Supporting sources
The will must manifest intent to incorporate the writing and the writing itself must be identified with enough clarity that its contents and existence at execution are free from doubt. Extrinsic evidence may be admitted to resolve factual questions about presence and identification.
Supporting sources
Beyond the value of the converted chattel, a plaintiff may recover additional pecuniary loss, including lost use, when that loss is proved with reasonable certainty. Lost profits or rental value during the period of deprivation are recoverable if the evidence removes undue speculation.
Supporting sources