Craig's Crocodile Inc.

366 Words2 Pages
As we read the Craig’s Crocodiles Inc. case and analyzed it, we got that Le Femme the Vice president of the operations of Craig’s Crocodiles Inc. on January 1, 2008, signed a three year lease of a 2,500 square feet office, and 20,000 square feet warehouse which are both in the state of Gould from Pauly Property Management. On January2nd, 2009 the Mr. Cravat the president of the Craig’s Crocodile Inc. let Pauly Property Management know that he doesn’t need the indicated warehouse and the office space anymore. The main point is that the Management is suing Craig’s Crocodile for $372,000 which also includes $72,000 in the resnt which was not paid and $300,000 in disciplinary expenses. The damages include the award of the money planned to give back a no breaking party for the loss of the good deal (Woodburn). The rule that requires the landowner to make sensible efforts to lease the property again is one of the most important duties to mitigate damages (man). Therefore, the management company leased the properties to the Craig’s Crocodile Inc. with three year lease contract; however, the Craig’s Crocodile Inc. broke the lease contract and left the property leasing and the remaining two years lease not paid. A court looking at these the whole story may try to apply the compensatory indemnity and applicant might make progress the $72,000 for voluntary rent, while there is an extra fact that must be taken in consideration in order to fully press this accomplishment. Consequently, to discover whether the management company made reasonable efforts to re-lease the space (Legal Match). Finally, we get that the Pauly Property Management most likely not prevails in the courts because of missing facts that are not supporting the sense of duty to mitigate damages. Works Cited Legal Match. 02 09 2010. 20 04 2011

More about Craig's Crocodile Inc.

Open Document