Chamberlain
contracts with Parker to have a painting of himself painted.
Parker
doesn't finish the painting.
The
difference in value is $0, since the guy was ugly in the first place.
Is
there any liability for the painter for just walking away?
Court
ruled in this case that the painter must complete painting.
In
this case, the market doesn't reflect the value of the painting to the
plaintiff.In the Jacob & Young vs. Kent case,
the market value is the same as
the value to the plaintiff.Market
value is a reasonable standard in some cases, but it is not a reasonable
standard in other cases.
