- Joined
- Mar 21, 2005
- Messages
- 25,893
- Reaction score
- 12,484
- Location
- New York, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not very confident on this point, but my understanding is that judges quite often hold hearings to determine damages that result from violation of contract. Why would they do this if they are bound to restrict the damage award to what is specified in the contract?
In the business context, judges can do that because it's simple to calculate damages. In the relationship context, it's literally impossible.
If I sign a contract to split half of the profits of a sale of widgets with you and then break the contract, you can sue me for half the profits.
If I sign a contract to be your friend in consideration for you being mine, and then act like a jerk, you can't sue me for half the value of my friendship.
As for this being contrary to public policy, that a moot point in that this whole question is predicated upon the adoption of this measure being viewed by the public as something that does further the public interest.
Ok.
At least must have failed to see how evolution of a too free slutciety damages and changes our childrens values
You know what else harms kids? Telling them stupid ****ing conspiracy theories.