Hadley v. Baxendale (Before answering the questions for this case, there is one important fact that you must understand about the circumstances surrounding this case - in England, in 1854, it was common for mills to have extra crankshafts on hand in case one broke. If you were to ask the ordinary man-on-the-street during that time, he would say that a mill would likely have an extra crankshaft. The fact that the Hadleys didn't have an extra one would have been considered unusual. ) 1. What were the basic facts of this case? 2. Why was the Hadley's mill shut down while waiting for Baxendale to perform? Would it have been common in England in 1854 for a mill to be completely shut down if their main crankshaft broke? Why or why not? 3. Did Baxendale breach the contract? Should the Hadleys get back the money they paid Baxendale up front? Do you think the Hadleys could have hired another carrier and made Baxendale pay any difference in price between his services and the replacement carrier's? What would we call these types of damages? 4. Were the Hadleys awarded their lost profits? Why or why not? 5. What simple thing could the Hadleys have done differently to entitle them to recover lost profits (consequential damages) in this case