Marta Ferreira is a hard-working and very talented investment adviser. Until recently, she worked for Globo Finance Inc, one the leading companies in the field. She earned approximately $750 000 a year and she consistently received very positive reviews from her clients. Because she always remained calm and cool even in the most stressful situations, her co-workers gave her the nickname "Ice". The company, unfortunately, was less happy with Marta's performance. After discovering that she had broken a number of rules and policies, it decided to fire her. The terms of her employment contract contained two relevant provisions. The first provision said that the company was entitled to fire Marta, at any time and without notice, if she committed a "serious" breach of her obligations. The second provision said that if Marta was not guilty of a "serious" breach, the company could fire her by providing either three months' notice or "payment in lieu" (that is, payment of three months' salary). The company explained the first option to Marta and then told her to get out and stay out. Marta understandably was upset and angry at the time. Somewhat surprisingly, she continues to be very distressed. Because of her emotions, she has not been able to find a new job. It is now one year later. Marta has sued the company for damages under two headings. First, since the company now admits that Marta's various misdeeds did not include a "serious" breach, she believes that she is entitled to damages for lost income. Second, she claims that she is entitled to damages because of all of the stress and unhappiness that the company has caused her. Explain the damages that Marta is likely to receive from a court.