Opinion ID: 2090001
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Count I: Chung Contract

Text: Under the terms of the lease's assignment clause, the landlord's consent to a proposed assignment could not be unreasonably withheld, delayed or conditioned so long as the proposed assignee had a financial statement that is equal to or better than the financial statement of [ESS]. [18] The trial court found that the landlord's original insistence on conditioning the assignment to Mrs. Chung on her acceptance of the original contract rent rather than the reduced rent provided in the 1992 rent-reduction addendum was inconsistent with the plain language of the lease and thus a breach of the assignment provision. It further held, however, that notwithstanding this breach, ESS had failed to prove it suffered damages as a result of the breach because the landlord had valid concerns over Mrs. Chung's financial situation and ESS could not demonstrate that these concerns were unreasonable. ESS challenges the court's finding that its alleged damages were not proximately caused by appellees' breach of its contractual duty, arguing that as a result of the landlord's breach it suffered lost profit from the sale and subsequent business losses. Under a breach of contract... a defendant is liable for such damages as are the natural consequence and proximate result of his conduct. Murphy v. O'Donnell, 63 A.2d 340, 342 (D.C.1948) (quoting Thompson v. Rector, 83 U.S.App. D.C. 371, 373, 170 F.2d 167, 169 (1948)); Bacmo Assocs. v. Strange, 388 A.2d 487, 489 (D.C.1978) (same). While damages are not required to be proven with mathematical certainty, there must be some reasonable basis on which to estimate damages. Romer v. District of Columbia, 449 A.2d 1097, 1100 (D.C.1982). The trial court's finding that the landlord had reasonable concerns regarding the proposed assignee's financial status given irregularities in the unaudited financial statement and other materials presented by Mrs. Chung, concerns which were later validated when the financial statement was proved fabricated, is not clearly erroneous. Although ESS may have suffered damages as a result of the contract with Mrs. Chung not closing, because the landlord's concerns were reasonable and ESS could not demonstrate to the trial court that Mrs. Chung's financial condition was comparable to that of ESS at the time it entered into the lease, the landlord's withholding of consent to the proposed assignment, even though in breach of the lease, was not a proximate cause of the alleged damages.