Handicapped Children's Education Board of Sheboygan County v. Lukaszewski, 112 Wis.2d 197, 332 N.W.2d 774 (1983) p651.

breach of contract

• P accepted an offer for a position by D.
• This job was located about 45 miles from P's home.
• later D was offered a job that paid more and was closer to her home
• D decided she wanted the other job and submitted a letter of resignation to P.
• D began work at new job.
• P refused to release D from her contract.
• D went back to work for D.
• While working for D she expressed misgivings about her job. She said she felt quite upset about the situation.
• P consulted her doctor and he found she had high blood pressure. Dr. suggested she needed to improve her situation and it might be dangerous for her to drive long distances in her agitated state.
• Based on the doctor's findings, P again submitted a letter of resignation.
• D found only one suitable replacement that cost about $1000 more per year than P.

In December of 1978 D initiated an action against P for breach of contract. D alleged that as a result of the breach it suffered damage in the amount of additional compensation it was required to pay P's replacement. The trial court ruled P had breached her contract and awarded D damages. Court of appeals upheld breach of contract rule, but reversed the damage award.

1. Did P breach her employment contract?
2. If she did breach her contract did D suffer recoverable damages?

A health danger will not excuse nonperformance of a contractual obligation when the danger is caused by the nonperforming party. Nor will a health condition that was foreseeable when the contract was entered justify its breach.

Damages for breach of contract are measured by the expectations of the parties.

1. D did breach her employment contract.
2. P is entitled to have the benefit of its bargain restored and therefore is entitled to damages that occurred from the hiring of the more expensive replacement.

P cause her medical problems by choosing to live so far from D's place of work. There is also doubt that D resigned only for health reasons. She said she resented working there. Also she had had the blood pressure problem for at least 5 years prior. Long held that an employer may recover damages from an employee who has failed to perform an employment contract. P's additional cost unquestionably resulted from the breach. P neither expected nor wanted a more experienced replacement. D's breach forced the board to hire the replacement and in turn to pay a higher salary. Therefore D lost its benefit of its bargain. Because D had no alternative, and is expected to mitigate its damages, it hired the only available replacement at the higher cost.

Dissent: No evidence that blood pressure would have improved if D had moved closer to P's workplace. So it is not relevant that the court held it was her choice to live so far away.