The correct answer is B. Jeff had a duty to mitigate his damages by looking for a new apple supplier. His failure to use reasonable diligence to mitigate his damages means that the amount of damages he recovers should be reduced by the amount that might have been avoided by mitigation. The duty to mitigate only reduces recovery; it does not prohibit recovery. Note however, that even though recovery is not prohibited, in this case Jeff could have avoided all loss by going to another apple supplier. Since Jeff could have avoided the loss entirely, his recovery will be reduced to zero.You are correct! Proceed to Exercise 9 >