Question

For $300,000, Michael agreed to build a new home for Ashton, who is very picky. Michael built the home to Ashton's specifications with one exception: the faucets and flooring in the upstairs bathroom were not exactly what Ashton specified. That was a mistake on Michael's part, but he did not intentionally fail to follow the specifications. When Ashton saw the bathroom, she went ballistic and told Michael that she would not pay Michael anything for the house. It will take $300 to put in the correct faucets and flooring. Michael responded that he is willing to pay $300 to put Ashton in the position she would have been in had the correct faucets and flooring been used, but that is all he is willing to pay. Analyze the legal issues at stake here and who would win any lawsuit and why. Be specific

Answer 1

• It is evident that Michael breached the contract but it was not material. Michael was not able to complete the work as per the Ashton contract.
• How ever Michael was not done it intentionally, still Ashton was aggrieved due to installation of faucets and flooring which are not accoridng to her specifications. Ashton has the right to blaim the micahel for breach of the contract.
• But rejecting the full payment by Ashton is unfair, even after micahel willing to pay compensatory damages of $300 which costs if flooring and faucet was installed as per Ashton specificaitons.
• If the lawsuit was filed by any of the party, It will be obviously in favour of the Michael because he has not done any fradulent activity, he completed all of the house as per Aston Specifications and due to inevitable cirumstances he was not installed items as per contract of Ashton in bathroom.Even though it is wrong to install, he is willing to accept and pay the compensatory charges.
• Hence the contract was not a material breach, it was fault with small part, The court will definetly orders Ashton to pay the contracted amount reducing the $300 or whatever the compensatory damages deemed appropriate decided by the court.
• The only point of the arguement which will be in favour of Ashton is she can demand for more money as compensatory damages in place of $300 which Michael offered to her, That to If she can able to convince and proove that work for faucet and flooring costs more than what michael offered in comparision with the market costs.

______________________________________________________________

Please Please up vote this answer. Your up vote is so valuable to me. Thank you so much. Please.

____________________________________________________