Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Medium

PT147 S2 P4 Q25 Explanation

Breach of Contract Remedies

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsPrimary PurposeLaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

A remedy that courts sometimes use in disputes involving a breach of contract is simply to compel the participants in the contract to do precisely what they have agreed to do. Specific performance, as this approach is called, can be used as an alternative to monetary damages—that is, to requiring the one than monetary damages, there are many instances in which it is clearly not a suitable remedy.

Whether or not specific performance is an appropriate remedy in a case depends on the particular characteristics of that case. It is often the only reasonable remedy when monetary damages could not adequately compensate the one who has been harmed by the breach of contract. For example, a contract may provide for best remedy would be to order that the contract be fulfilled exactly according to its terms.

Nevertheless, in many cases monetary payment can adequately compensate for the refusal to fulfill the terms of a contract, and thus the court commonly need not consider ordering specific performance. In fact, in some types of cases, court-enforced performance of the contract would actually be detrimental to those involved in the dispute entanglement in troublesome aspects of the disputed relationship while still providing relief to the wronged party.

What this question is testing

Primary Purpose

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
25.

The main purpose of the passage

Answer choices

  1. Out of Scope: standard10% picked this

    predict the consequences of following a policy whereby a particular legal remedy becomes

    The passage is never talking about what happens if "specific performance" becomes the standard legal remedy, and what the consequences would be. There's no context that makes it seem like people are considering making specific performance the standard. The author seems to be reacting to its usage as though it's used too frequently, but that's different from saying it's the standard approach.

  2. Out of Scope: new legal measure6% picked this

    argue for the implementation of a set of standards for the use of a

    There's no new legal measure being argued for. The author seems to be arguing against the use of specific performance for many cases. This isn't a new legal measure. It's just presented as something that courts already sometimes do.

  3. Out of Scope: group of procedures10% picked this

    explain the differences among a group of interrelated

    This passage only has two legal procedures, if we can call them 'procedures': 1. the procedure where I lose the court case and have to pay you money, monetary damages 2. the procedure in which I lose the court case and the court orders me to follow through on a contractual promise I made. The author isn't trying to explain differences among a group of interrelated procedures. The author is discussing situations in which #1 is better and situations in which #2 is better.

  4. Out of Scope: evaluation of evidence5% picked this

    generate a set of guidelines for the evaluation of evidence in a particular type

    Nothing in this passage has to do with the trial phase of a case, where we would be evaluating evidence. This passage is only about the punishment stage after the judge has ruled in the plaintiff's favor.

  5. Correct70% picked this

    identify some criteria for the application of two different

    Why this is right

    This is a very bleh answer that doesn't seem to well capture the vibe of the passage, but it's at least centered on the right central topic (monetary damages vs. specific performance -- two different legal remedies) and saying something true (the author does identify some criteria for when the former is better and when the latter is better). Specific performance is better if fulfilling a contractual obligation means "handing over a precious object the plaintiff badly wants". Monetary damages is better if fulfilling a contractual obligation means you'd have to show up at the house of the dude who just sued you and do work for him.

    Skill tested: Primary Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free