Question

Amber hired Mike for $25,000 to supervise the production of her crops, but then breaks the contract by firing Mike at the beginning of the season. A nearby grower hears what tragic thing happened to Mike, so he hires Mike for $23,000, Mike refuses to accept the job because of the $2,000 pay cut. He sues Amber for breaching the K and he received nothing. However Mike made no such effort to minimize his loses.

How much did the nearby grower offer to pay Mike for supervising the production of crops?
A) $23,000
B) $25,000
C) $27,000
D) $2,000

Answer 1

The nearby grower offered Mike $23,000 for supervising the production of crops. Mike's situation involves the 'duty to mitigate' losses in a breach of contract, which he failed to do by refusing the job offer from the nearby grower.The correct answer is option A.

Step-by-step explanation:

The nearby grower offered to pay Mike $23,000 for supervising the production of crops. This is highlighted in the question where it is stated that Mike was hired for $25,000 initially but then refused the $23,000 offer due to the pay cut.

Mike's refusal to accept the job with the nearby grower, and his decision to sue Amber for breaching the contract without making an effort to minimize his losses, centers around a legal concept known as 'duty to mitigate.' In a business context, particularly relating to employment contracts and breach of contract situations, individuals have a responsibility to mitigate their losses.

This often involves seeking comparable employment if they are terminated. In the provided case scenario, it would have made economic sense for Mike to accept the job offer from the nearby grower to reduce the damages owed due to Amber's breach of contract.The correct answer is option A.