Incorrect.  The court's position is that the non-breacher should receive damages arising in the usual course of things.  If it sees the lost profits as such damages, it will award them and thereby put the Hadley's back in the position they would have been in had the breach not occurred. 

In terms of the three step-procedure, the damage calculation looks like this. 

First, the contract-performed position:  No lost profits.

Second, the result-of-the-breach-proper-mitigation position:  Six days lost profits.

The court does not discuss mitigation.  Evidently, it assumes there were no reasonable steps the Hadleys could take to reduce their damages. 

Third, the award:  Award the lost profits--provided that one of these two things is true:  (1 the lost profits are damages arising in the usual course of things; or, (2) a reasonable person would, at the time of contracting, have thought the lost profits would be a probable result of the breach. 

Given that (1) is true, the court will award the lost profits. 

Continue