"Keep the Change!": A Critique of the No Actual Injury Defense to Liquidated Damages—Lind Building Corp. v. Pacific Bellevue Developments, 55 Wash. App. 70, 776 P.2d 977 (Div. 1), review denied, 113 Wash. 2d 1021, 781 P.2d 1322 (1989)

Authors

James Arthur Weisfield

Abstract

Most courts judge the enforceability of liquidated damages clauses as of the time of contract formation. In Lind Building Corp. v. Pacific Bellevue Development, the court created a "no actual injury" defense to enforcement of liquidated damages clauses by assessing validity as of the time of trial. This Note concludes that a "no actual injury" defense to liquidated damages recovery negates the benefits of agreed remedies, fails to provide a principled policy for enforcement, and produces inequitable results.

First Page

977

Recommended Citation

James A. Weisfield, Note, "Keep the Change!": A Critique of the No Actual Injury Defense to Liquidated Damages—Lind Building Corp. v. Pacific Bellevue Developments, 55 Wash. App. 70, 776 P.2d 977 (Div. 1), review denied, 113 Wash. 2d 1021, 781 P.2d 1322 (1989), 65 Wash. L. Rev. 977 (1990).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol65/iss4/13