254 Pa. Super. 509 - Ebright v. Shutter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““By the very nature of covenants not to compete, damages in the nature of lost profits are difficult to establish with mathematical certainty and only reasonable certainty will be required. Ross v. Houck, 184 Pa.Super. 448 , 136 A.2d 160 (1957). Cf. Jones v. Aronson, supra [ 45 Pa.Super. 148 (1911) ]. Often the reasonable certainty required may be fulfilled by looking to a restitutionary measure of damages. See D. Dobbs, Remedies 150-53 (1973). Proof that the parties attached a particular value to the covenant not to compete for five years was competent evidence of the contractual loss appellees sustained during the time appellants operated a restaurant in competition with them; and, especially in the absence of alternative evidence of appellees’ actual loss, which appel lants never offered, the lower court’s award should be affirmed.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 326 Pa. Super. 170 - Sobers v. Shannon Optical Co., Inc.

2. “As a general rule, courts ordinarily do not grant damages in addition to specific performance, in large part because such an award would constitute an inequitable windfall for the promisee, at least where specific performance alone of the contract affords the promisee the full benefit of his bargain.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. McCoy v. Alsup

3. “Ebright v. Shutter, 254 Pa.Super. 509 , 386 A.2d 66, 68 (1978); 81A C.J.S. Specific Performance § 197 (1977); 71 Am.Jur.2d Specific Performance § 216 (1973).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. McCoy v. Alsup