Expectation damages award the plaintiff the difference between the value of the benefit reasonably expected as a result of the defendant’s agreed performance and the value she actually received (a.k.a., benefit of the bargain damages). The plaintiff is basically put into the position he or she would have been in had the defendant fully performed. Dalton Props., Inc. v. Jones, 683 P.2d 30, 31 (Nev. 1984).
The general goal of contract damages is to provide compensation for the injured party based on the injured party’s expectation interest. More specifically, it gives the injured party the “benefit of his bargain by awarding him a sum of money that will, to the extent possible, put him in as good a position as he would have been in had the contract been performed,” and no better.
Restitutionary damages restore to the plaintiff the goods he or she provided the defendant, the fair market value of the services he or she rendered for the benefit of the defendant, or otherwise require the defendant to disgorge any benefit received on account of the contract, in order to prevent the defendant’s unjust enrichment. An award of restitutionary damages puts the plaintiff in the position he or she would have been in had the defendant never come along.
 3 D. Dobbs, Law of Remedies § 12.2(1) at 22 (2d ed., 1993); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 347 (1981).
 See Colo. Env., Inc. v. Valley Grading Corp., 105 Nev. 464, 470; 779 P.2d 80, 84 (1989); Dalton Prop., Inc. v. Jones, 100 Nev. 422, 424, 683 P.2d 30, 31 (1984); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 347 cmt. a. (1981).
Generally, the market value measure of damages “allows the … victim to recover the market value of the very performance he should have had, less the contract price.” “[T]he measure of damage is the difference between the contract price and the market price of the goods at the time and place when the contract should have been performed.” Nevada has applied the market value measure to contracts involving the sale of real estate and the sale of goods.
 Turner Lumber Co. v. Tonopah Lumber Co., 38 Nev. 338, 339, 153 P. 254, 255 (1915).
 See generally Turner Lumber Co., 38 Nev. 338; J.J. Indus., LLC v. Bennett, 119 Nev. 269, 71 P.3d 1264 (2003); Regent Int’l v. Lear, 103 Nev. 33, 732 P.2d 861 (1987); Harris v. Shell Dev. Corp., 95 Nev. 348, 594 P.2d 731 (1979).
I’m happy to announce that my book, “Federal Court Civil Litigation Checklist”, made it to BookAuthority’s Best Litigation eBooks of All Time:
BookAuthority collects and ranks the best books in the world, and it is a great honor to get this kind of recognition. Thank you for all your support! The book is available for purchase on Amazon.