Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: April 8, 2020
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comWhen the other party breaches your contract, that doesn’t always mean you’re off the hook. Under New Jersey law, a party claiming damages for a breach of contract has an obligation to use reasonable efforts to lessen or reduce the resulting damages.

More specifically, under New Jersey contract law, a party who suffers injury or damage because of a breach must make a reasonable effort to avoid or minimize the loss by taking advantage of any reasonable business or employment opportunities that may be available under the circumstances. If a party fails to mitigate damages, the court may limit or reduce the amount of damages.
By way of example, let’s assume two parties entered into a contractual agreement whereby the breaching party agreed to deliver goods to the other party. If at the time of the expected performance the party does not fulfill the obligation, the non-breaching party has an obligation to attempt to procure the goods by other means in order to fully recover damages.
Contract mitigation also often comes into play when one party breaches a lease agreement. For instance, if a tenant breaks the lease and vacates the premises without legal justification, the landlord must try to rent the property to another tenant as soon as reasonably possible in an effort to limit the losses. Further, the landlord has the burden of proving the reasonableness of the mitigation efforts.
Employees also have a duty to mitigate their losses. In the employment context, a worker who alleges wrongful termination is obligated to attempt to find similar employment. As in the other examples, the failure to do so may result in a reduction of any damages that may be awarded.
In a breach of contract lawsuit, the defendant has the burden of proving that the plaintiff failed to take reasonable steps to minimize damages. For instance, in a wrongful termination suit, the defendant may argue that the employee failed to pursue subsequent employment opportunities. Specifically, the defendant employer must show that the employee could reasonably have taken advantage of comparable substitute employment and the amount of any such earnings. If the court is satisfied that the employer has satisfied the burden of proof, any subsequent earnings that employee could reasonably have earned if the employee had taken advantage of an available employment opportunity will be subtracted from the damages the employee claims to have suffered as a result of the alleged wrongful termination.
Similarly, in the context of a residential or commercial lease, the defendant may seek to reduce its damages by offering evidence that the landlord did not take actions to re-rent the property and simply let it sit vacant. If that defense is proven, the landlord will not be awarded the full amount of the unpaid rent, and its claim for lost rent will be reduced accordingly.
The failure to mitigate your losses can turn a fairly straightforward breach of contract lawsuit into protracted and costly litigation. If you are the victim of a contract breach, you must be diligent about mitigating your losses. While New Jersey courts don’t expect you to make a heroic effort, you must be able to show that your actions were reasonable in the circumstances. Accordingly, it is always advisable to keep records of your efforts to mitigate your damages, i.e. resumes submitted for new jobs, advertisements placed to lease a property, or emails seeking a substitute vendor for goods/services.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Jessica Faustin, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-896-4100.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

High-profile founder litigation is more than just a media spectacle. For startup founders, these cases underscore the legal and structural risks that can arise when rapid growth outpaces formal oversight. While launching a new company can be both an exciting and deeply rewarding endeavor, founders must be mindful that it also comes with significant risks. […]
Author: Dan Brecher

Every New Jersey company should periodically evaluate its governance framework. Strong corporate governance protects directors and officers, builds investor confidence, reduces litigation exposure, and positions a company for sustainable growth. The first quarter of the year is a great time to evaluate your corporate governance practices and perform any routine maintenance needed to keep that […]
Author: Ken Hollenbeck

Being served with a lawsuit is one of the most stressful legal events a business or individual can face. Whether the claim involves a contract dispute, an employment matter, an intellectual property issue, or another legal challenge, the actions you take in the first few days can significantly shape the outcome of your case. Acting […]
Author: Robert E. Levy

Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) continue to gain momentum as we move through 2026. After enduring a significant contraction following the 2021 boom and the regulatory scrutiny that followed, SPAC activity rebounded sharply in 2025 and now carries forward into 2026 with real momentum. The SPAC resurgence reflects broader improvements in both market conditions and the […]
Author: Dan Brecher

Compliance programs are no longer judged by how they look on paper, but by how they function in the real world. Compliance monitoring is the ongoing process of reviewing, testing, and evaluating whether policies, procedures, and controls are being followed—and whether they are actually working. What Is Compliance Monitoring? In today’s heightened regulatory environment, compliance […]
Author: Dan Brecher

New Jersey personal guaranty liability is a critical issue for business owners who regularly sign contracts on behalf of their companies. A recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision provides valuable guidance on when a business owner can be held personally responsible for a company’s debt. Under the Court’s decision in Extech Building Materials, Inc. v. […]
Author: Charles H. Friedrich
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!