ASC hired City to serve as ASC's exclusive real estate agent in the Atlanta area.
ASC was looking for land to develop for two showrooms for Volvo. City found suitable land for ASC and received a five percent commission on the purchases.
At ASC's request, City then called for construction proposals and invited developers to pitch construction alternatives. Each developer promised to pay City a commission if it got the job. One developer, Seefried, did not have in-house construction services, so it called upon Catamount Constructors to help it with a bid. Seefried and Catamount did not have a contract but Seefried anticipated hiring Catamount if it won the construction job.

1. The court did not mention the compensatory damages in the part of the decision quoted here. Can you think of a reason why?
2. Could City have other claims against ASC that might allow it to collect damages?