Skip to content
  • CAREERS
  • CONTACT US
Search
Close this search box.
anthony ostlund logo
  • PEOPLE
  • LITIGATION
    • APPEALS
    • COMPLEX COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
    • EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
    • FRAUD AND FIDUCIARY DUTY
    • FINANCIAL LITIGATION
    • OWNER/SHAREHOLDER DISPUTES
    • PLAINTIFF CONTINGENCY CASES
    • PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
    • REAL ESTATE LITIGATION
    • TRUSTS AND ESTATES LAW
  • SUCCESSES
  • NEWS
  • ABOUT
  • FEE ARRANGEMENTS
Menu
  • PEOPLE
  • LITIGATION
    • APPEALS
    • COMPLEX COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
    • EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
    • FRAUD AND FIDUCIARY DUTY
    • FINANCIAL LITIGATION
    • OWNER/SHAREHOLDER DISPUTES
    • PLAINTIFF CONTINGENCY CASES
    • PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
    • REAL ESTATE LITIGATION
    • TRUSTS AND ESTATES LAW
  • SUCCESSES
  • NEWS
  • ABOUT
  • FEE ARRANGEMENTS

Damages in Fraud Cases, Not Just Out-Of-Pockets

  • July 1, 2013
The Hennepin Lawyer, Official Publication of the Hennepin County Bar Association
Author: Vince Louwagie (co-authored with Andrea Davenport)

Victims of fraud have traditionally been advised that their recovery is determined by the “out-of-pocket” measure. With increasing regularity, however, Minnesota courts have used an alternative measure in fraud cases where the out-of-pocket measure does not accomplish justice.

 

One such alternative measure is “benefit-of-the-bargain” damages, a measure akin to a typical measure of damages in contract cases.  In Minnesota, the measure of damages recoverable for fraud has generally been limited to out-of-pocket damages. “The out-of-pocket rule allows damages to be recovered which are the natural and proximate loss sustained by a party because of reliance on a misrepresentation.”1 In other words, this measure of damages allows a plaintiff to recover, as suggested by its name, what he or she has spent “out of pocket,” or what he or she has actually lost, in reliance on a misrepresentation. However, the out-of-pocket rule does not allow a plaintiff to recover what he or she might have gained through a transaction had it not been fraudulent. Out-of-pocket damages aim only to reimburse the plaintiff, and therefore they do not give the plaintiff any more than what they actually lost in reliance on the misrepresentation.

 

The out-of-pocket measure is typically the default for fraud damages. This promotes the goal of awarding damages in fraud cases to restore the status quo ante. The court aims to put the plaintiff back in the position he or she was in before reliance on the misrepresentation. Usually, this is accomplished by reimbursing the plaintiff for money spent or otherwise lost in reliance on the misrepresentation. Awarding more than out-of-pocket damages puts the plaintiff in a better position than he was in before the misrepresentation.  In addition, out-of-pocket damages are often less speculative than other forms of damages.  This is because it is generally easier to compute losses that have already been realized than it is to compute damages based on what a plaintiff may have gained had a misrepresentation been true. Tort law disfavors speculative damage awards. Therefore, out-of-pocket damages are the general measure of damages in fraud cases.

related attorneys

Loading...

related practice areas

Loading...
AO-logo-initials

90 SOUTH 7TH STREET, SUITE 3600
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402
P 612.349.6969       F 612.349.6996

 

© 2021 ANTHONY OSTLUND LOUWAGIE DRESSEN BOYLAN P.A.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

  • 651•312•6500
  • 651•312•6618
  • People
  • Litigation
  • Successes
  • News
  • About
  • Fee Arrangements
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • People
  • Litigation
  • Successes
  • News
  • About
  • Fee Arrangements
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • PEOPLE
  • LITIGATION
    • APPEALS
    • COMPLEX COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
    • EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
    • FRAUD AND FIDUCIARY DUTY
    • FINANCIAL LITIGATION
    • OWNER/SHAREHOLDER DISPUTES
    • PLAINTIFF CONTINGENCY CASES
    • PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
    • REAL ESTATE LITIGATION
    • TRUSTS AND ESTATES LAW
  • SUCCESSES
  • NEWS
  • ABOUT
  • FEE ARRANGEMENTS
  • PEOPLE
  • LITIGATION
    • APPEALS
    • COMPLEX COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
    • EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
    • FRAUD AND FIDUCIARY DUTY
    • FINANCIAL LITIGATION
    • OWNER/SHAREHOLDER DISPUTES
    • PLAINTIFF CONTINGENCY CASES
    • PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
    • REAL ESTATE LITIGATION
    • TRUSTS AND ESTATES LAW
  • SUCCESSES
  • NEWS
  • ABOUT
  • FEE ARRANGEMENTS
search
disclaimer
Linkedin
Join Our Email List

© 2021 ANTHONY OSTLUND LOUWAGIE DRESSEN BOYLAN P.A. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT