1. A fraud injury can be measured in two ways. As a loss of the benefit of the bargain, damages consist of the difference between the value of what was promised and the value of what was received. Under the out-of-pocket rule, the measure is the difference between the price paid and the market value of what was received. If Haywood had established her claim, which of these methods would have applied? Why?

2. Suppose that reliance was not an element of a consumer fraud claim under the ICFA. Would the result in this case have been different? Explain.