[A] complaint on breach of contract must allege: (1) the existence of a valid and binding contract; (2) the plaintiff's compliance with the contract and his performance of the obligations under it; (3) a general averment of the performance of any condition precedent; and (4) damages suffered as a result of defendant's breach. McCasland v. Prather, 1978-NMCA-098, 92 N.M. 192, 585 P.2d 336, 338 (citing Wright and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 1235 (1969) ). Applying these principles in Armijo v. N.M. Dep't of Transp., No. CIV. 08-0336 JB/ACT, 2009 WL 1329192 (D.N.M. Apr. 6, 2009) (Browning, J.), the Court found that a plaintiff's allegations failed to state a claim for breach of contract.
[A] complaint on breach of contract must allege: (1) the existence of a valid and binding contract; (2) the plaintiff's compliance with the contract and his performance of the obligations under it; (3) a general averment of the performance of any condition precedent; and (4) damages suffered as a result of defendant's breach.McCasland v. Prather, 1978-NMCA-098, ¶ 7, 585 P.2d 336, 338.
The question is procedural. The trial court, by granting the motion, ruled the plaintiff did not state a claim recognized under New Mexico law. Dismissal of a contract claim on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is a legal, not evidentiary, determination. McCasland v. Prather, 92 N.M. 192, 585 P.2d 336 (Ct.App. 1978). McCasland states:
Consequently, her reliance on McCasland v. Prather for the proposition “that contracts for an indefinite period of time may be terminated at the will of either party[, ]” is off base. (See Doc. 37 at 16 (quoting McCasland, 585 P.2d 336, 342 (N.M. Ct. App. 1978) (Sutin, J., dissenting)).)
[A] complaint on breach of contract must allege: (1) the existence of a valid and binding contract; (2) the plaintiff's compliance with the contract and his performance of the obligations under it; (3) a general averment of the performance of any condition precedent; and (4) damages suffered as a result of defendant's breach. McCasland v. Prather, 1978-NMCA-098, ¶ 7, 585 P.2d 336, 338. Applying these principles in Armijo v. New Mexico Department of Transportation, No. CIV. 08-0336 JB/ACT, 2009 WL 1329192 (D.N.M. Apr. 6, 2009)(Browning, J.), the Court concluded that a plaintiff's allegations failed to state a claim for breach of contract.
[A] complaint on breach of contract must allege: (1) the existence of a valid and binding contract; (2) the plaintiff's compliance with the contract and his performance of the obligations under it; (3) a general averment of the performance of any condition precedent; and (4) damages suffered as a result of defendant's breach.McCasland v. Prather, 1978–NMCA–098, ¶ 7, 92 N.M. 192, 585 P.2d 336, 338. Similarly, under New York law, "[t]he elements of a breach of contract claim are: ‘(1) a contract; (2) performance by the party seeking recovery; (3) breach of the contract by the other party; and (4) damages attributable to the breach.’ "
[A] complaint on breach of contract must allege: (1) the existence of a valid and binding contract; (2) the plaintiff's compliance with the contract and his performance of the obligations under it; (3) a general averment of the performance of any condition precedent; and (4) damages suffered as a result of defendant's breach.McCasland v. Prather, 1978-NMCA-098, ¶ 7, 585 P.2d 336, 338.
According to BANA, Plaintiffs' two breach of contract claims fail because Plaintiffs do not adequately allege: (1) the existence of a contract, (2) Plaintiffs' compliance with the contract, (3) "a general averment of the performance of any condition precedent," and (4) damages caused by the breach of contract. BANA copies these elements from McCasland v. Prather, 92 N.M. 192, 194 (N.M. Ct. App. 1978), a case which contains an antiquated statement of New Mexico law. In more recent cases, the New Mexico courts list the four elements of a breach of contract claim as: (1) the existence of a contract, (2) the breach of the contract, (3) causation, and (4) damages.
[A] complaint on breach of contract must allege: (1) the existence of a valid and binding contract; (2) the plaintiff's compliance with the contract and his performance of the obligations under it; (3) a general averment of the performance of any condition precedent; and (4) damages suffered as a result of defendant's breach.McCasland v. Prather, 92 N.M. 192, 194, 585 P.2d 336, 338 (Ct.App.1978). Applying these principles in Armijo v. N.M. Dep't of Transp., the Court found that a plaintiffs' allegations failed to state a claim for breach of contract. SeeNo.
The proper standard for appellate review in this situation is whether "in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and with every doubt resolved in his behalf, the complaint states any valid claim for relief." McCasland v. Prather, 92 N.M. 192, 585 P.2d 336 (Ct.App. 1978). Neither Hockett nor Musgrove apply.