## Facts

- Henry and Alice Bumann (buyers) entered a contract with Eimer and Dorothy Maurer (sellers) to purchase real property that included farmland and a residence.
- The sellers did not complete the sale when required, leading the buyers to file suit seeking (1) specific performance compelling conveyance and (2) damages for the period of delayed performance and possession.
- After issue was joined and as trial approached, the sellers conveyed the property to the buyers, making specific performance no longer in dispute.
- The case proceeded to a jury trial limited to determining what damages, if any, the buyers could recover for the sellers’ delay in completing the transaction and turning over possession.
- Over the sellers’ objection, the trial court instructed the jury using the general contract-damages statute, N.D.C.C. § 32-03-09 (damages equal to “all the detriment proximately caused” by the breach, unless another measure is “otherwise expressly provided” by law).
- The jury returned a verdict for the buyers of $8,292.33, and judgment was entered on that verdict.
- The sellers moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, alternatively, a new trial; the district court denied the motion.
- The sellers appealed, focusing primarily on whether the jury was instructed with the correct legal measure of damages.

## Issues

1. Did the trial court err by instructing the jury under N.D.C.C. § 32-03-09’s general contract-damages measure, rather than the more specific statutory and common-law rules governing damages for breach of an agreement to convey real property?
2. If the damages instruction was incorrect, must the judgment be reversed and the case remanded for a new trial limited to damages?

## Decision

- The North Dakota Supreme Court held the challenged damages instruction was improper for this dispute involving a delayed conveyance of real property.
- The court ruled that N.D.C.C. § 32-03-09 is a default measure and does not control when more specific law supplies the measure of damages for the type of contract at issue.
- The court reversed the judgment and remanded for a new trial limited to determining damages under the proper measure.

## Legal Principles

- N.D.C.C. § 32-03-09 provides a general contract-damages measure that applies only when no other measure is “otherwise expressly provided” by North Dakota law.
- For agreements to convey real property, North Dakota law provides more specific damages rules than the general “all detriment proximately caused” formulation; those specific rules control.
- In land-sale disputes, North Dakota has applied a land-contract measure tied to the relationship between the contract price and the value of the land at the time of breach, rather than an open-ended consequential-damages standard.
- When performance is ultimately rendered (the property is conveyed) and only delay is claimed, the recoverable damages must be determined under the correct real-property conveyance rules, not the general contract-damages statute.
- An incorrect jury instruction on the governing measure of damages is reversible error, and when liability or performance is no longer contested, a remand may be limited to a new trial on damages.

## Conclusion

Because the trial court instructed the jury on damages using N.D.C.C. § 32-03-09’s general contract-damages standard even though North Dakota law supplies specific rules for damages arising from an agreement to convey real property, the Supreme Court reversed the damages judgment and remanded for a new trial confined to determining damages under the proper legal measure.


Bumann v. Maurer, 203 N.W.2d 434 (1972)