Case Citation
Legal Case Name

COLONIAL AT LYNNFIELD, INC. v. SLOAN Case Brief

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit1989
870 F.2d 761 Contracts Remedies Business Associations

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: A seller sued a buyer for breach of a real estate contract. The court refused to enforce a $200,000 liquidated damages clause because the seller suffered no actual loss and, in fact, profited from the breach by selling the property to another party for a higher price.

Legal Significance: Under Massachusetts law, a liquidated damages clause, even if reasonable when drafted, is an unenforceable penalty if it is grossly disproportionate to the actual damages suffered. This is known as the “second look” doctrine, which may preclude recovery where the non-breaching party suffers no loss.

COLONIAL AT LYNNFIELD, INC. v. SLOAN Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Plaintiff Colonial at Lynnfield, Inc. (Colonial) contracted to sell a 49% interest in its hotel to defendant Colonial Associates (Associates) for $3,375,000. The agreement contained a clause stipulating $200,000 in liquidated damages if the sale failed to close solely due to Associates’ fault. After the parties extended the original deadlines, Associates failed to close on the new date, June 1, 1981, because it could not secure the necessary financing. Colonial declared Associates in default. Approximately three months later, Colonial sold a 50% interest in the hotel to a third party, Lincoln National Development Corporation, for $3.7 million. Adjusting for the 1% difference in interest sold, the new deal yielded Colonial $251,000 more than the contract with Associates. Colonial sued to enforce the $200,000 liquidated damages provision. The district court found for Colonial, holding the clause was a reasonable estimate of potential damages at the time of contracting. Associates appealed, arguing the clause was an unenforceable penalty.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Under Massachusetts law, is a liquidated damages clause that was reasonable at the time of contracting enforceable when the non-breaching party suffers no actual damages and instead realizes a significant profit from the breach?

No. The liquidated damages clause is an unenforceable penalty. While the clause Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Under Massachusetts law, is a liquidated damages clause that was reasonable at the time of contracting enforceable when the non-breaching party suffers no actual damages and instead realizes a significant profit from the breach?

Conclusion

This case establishes that in jurisdictions applying a "second look" doctrine, courts Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, q

Legal Rule

A liquidated damages clause is enforceable if (1) at the time of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dol

Legal Analysis

The court applied a two-part analysis to the liquidated damages clause. First, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolo

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Under Massachusetts law, a liquidated damages clause, even if reasonable when
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?