## Facts

- Buyers contracted on March 8, 1971, to purchase a “well-wooded lot” with a house under construction from the seller-builder; closing occurred September 21, 1971.
- After contracting but before closing, the seller removed substantial quantities of loam, gravel, trees, and shrubs from the land.
- One buyer observed extensive tree removal and told the seller’s president to stop; the seller continued stripping the lot.
- The seller sold approximately 3,600 cubic yards of gravel (about 360 truckloads) to a third party.
- Buyers did not consent to the removals except as necessary for construction of the house and septic system.
- The purchase price ($26,900) did not reflect any reduction for the depletion of natural materials.
- In an equity action for specific performance and damages, a master’s report (adopted by the trial court) awarded $6,480 plus interest, including the fair market value of the removed gravel measured when loaded on trucks.
- The Appeals Court reversed the damages measure, limiting recovery to diminution in land value.
- Further appellate review was granted solely on the proper measure of damages.

## Issues

1. In a buyer’s contract action for pre-closing removal and sale of subsurface materials by the seller, may damages include the fair market value of the removed gravel, or are damages limited to diminution in the value of the land?
2. If market value of the removed gravel is recoverable, must that value exclude any increase attributable to the seller’s excavation and loading efforts?

## Decision

- The court held that, in a breach of contract action, buyers may recover damages based on the fair market value of the gravel wrongfully removed, in addition to the contract price for the land.
- The recoverable value may not include any enhancement attributable to the seller’s efforts in excavating and loading the gravel for sale.
- The judgment was vacated as to damages and the case was remanded for redetermination consistent with this measure.

## Legal Principles

- After execution of a real estate purchase agreement, the seller must not materially alter or deplete the property contrary to the contract’s implicit premise that the land will be conveyed substantially as represented absent agreement to the contrary.
- Contract damages protect the buyer’s expectation interest: the buyer is entitled to the difference between what should have been received under the contract and what was actually received.
- When severable natural resources are wrongfully removed pre-closing, the market value of the severed materials can be an appropriate measure of contract damages and may better approximate the buyer’s loss than an abstract diminution-in-value calculation.
- A buyer’s recovery for removed materials must exclude value added by the breaching seller’s labor or processing; the buyer is compensated for what should have remained, not awarded the benefit of the seller’s post-breach efforts.

## Conclusion

The court permitted buyers to recover, as contract damages, the market value of gravel wrongfully removed and sold by the seller between contract and closing, but required that valuation to exclude any increase attributable to the seller’s excavation and loading work, and remanded for recalculation of damages under that rule.


Laurin v. DeCarolis Constr. Co., 372 Mass. 688, 363 N.E.2d 675 (1977)