A more thorough explanation:

The avoidable-consequences doctrine, also known as the mitigation-of-damages doctrine, is a legal principle that requires a plaintiff to take reasonable steps to minimize the effects of an injury or breach of contract. If the plaintiff fails to do so, the defendant may argue that the plaintiff's recovery should be reduced.

For example, if a tenant breaks a lease agreement and moves out before the end of the lease term, the landlord has a duty to mitigate damages by making reasonable efforts to find a new tenant. If the landlord fails to do so and the property remains vacant, the tenant may argue that the landlord's damages should be reduced because they could have been avoided.

Another example is if a person is injured in a car accident and fails to seek medical treatment, the defendant may argue that the plaintiff's damages should be reduced because they could have been avoided or minimized if the plaintiff had sought medical attention.

These examples illustrate how the avoidable-consequences doctrine requires plaintiffs to take reasonable steps to minimize damages and how failure to do so may result in a reduction of their recovery.