With respect to the other consequential damages claimed, I am of the view that since they owned and elected to keep the property they have both the benefit and the expense of it. As Kerans J., as he then was, stated in McCulloch v. Gazelle, supra, at p. 198: They also claim loss for moneys paid out for taxes and mortgage interest during the brief interval between the completion date of the aborted sale and the date of the resale. Such expenses are the normal expenses of ownership of land, and the corresponding value to them was its use and occupation. I cannot infer that the plaintiffs did not get the advantage of this use during the intervening month. I assume the plaintiffs in Lozcal did not. The claim is rejected.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.