#26 - Global Reference, Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[tch16]

Why is answer choice C wrong? Is it just because of the "in general"? Lines 39-42 seem to talk about coercive court-ordered remedies, but I guess it's referring specifically to employment cases?

Also, why is A correct? The author refers to specific performance as an "alternative" several times-- is that helpful here? Or is it lines 15-18 ("It is often the only reasonable remedy when monetary damages could not...")? But even with this quote, it doesn't necessarily mean that monetary remedies should always be considered first, right?

Thanks!

[tch16]

Oh wait, I see that lines 27-30 clear up why A is correct. Sorry about that. But can you still explain why C is wrong?

Thanks!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi tech16,

Answer (C) states, "In general, coercive court-ordered remedies in contract violation cases are unfair and should be avoided," with the question asking us to identify the statement the author would most likely agree with.

The language "In general" seems too broad to fit the passage. The first of the two paragraphs gives several examples when specific performance would be appropriate, so it doesn't seem like the author would think specific performance is in general unfair. Indeed, the author says (around lines 14-15) that one should adopt a case-by-case approach to applying specific performance.

The second paragraph does give examples of when money damages would be preferable, and mentions problems like psychological friction that can arise if specific performance is used when money damages would be more appropriate. But this isn't enough for concluding that a court's order of specific performance is generally unfair and should be avoided. Again, the first paragraph gives several examples of the author taking specific performance to be a valuable tool.

Hope that helps!

[tld5061]

Hi,

Is the reason that B is incorrect because it says "usually" while the passage says "often" and often can be defined as frequently but not necessarily usually? Am I missing anything else?

THanks!

[Adam Tyson]

Actually, tld5061, with regard to those personal property sales cases, the author doesn't even say that specific performance is often the appropriate remedy, only that it sometimes may be (like when the property is unique and a financial loss can't be easily calculated). That's one very limited example, and it's too weak to support a claim about what's usual or even about what's often true. Answer B is much too strong a statement for us to believe, based on the text, that our author would agree with it.

Good job spotting the priblem with "usually", but be even more careful about what the text does and does not say in order to avoid other, more attractive trap answers down the road.

[sarah_tucker@alumni.brown.edu]

Is A correct because of the first two sentences of the second paragraph: " Whether or not specific performance is an appropriate remedy in a case depends on the particular characteristics of that case. It is often the only reasonable remedy when monetary damages could not adequately compensate the one who has been harmed by the breach of contract."

Since the author says that specific performance is reasonable when monetary damages cannot adequately compensate, we can infer the author believes monetary damages should be considered first? Want to make sure I am looking in the right place when reviewing this question!

[Adam Tyson]

That's certainly part of the support for answer A, Sarah! But also consider the first two sentences of the third paragraph, as well as the last sentence of the first paragraph. Throughout the passage, the theme is that specific performance is a limited remedy that should only be used when other remedies are not suitable or available. Specific performance can be problematic for many reasons, and if the damaged party can be made whole by being paid money, that is almost always going to be preferable.