6 Third Parties, Performance and Discharge of Contracts, and Remedies Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you will be able to: Describe...
This question has been answered
Question

Hello,  Can you please help me answer these discussion questions,

and use 1 quote within the response from the attached chapter from the text:
Rogers, S. (2012). Essentials of Business Law [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/


Read the Case Campbell Soup Co. v. Wentz in the text. Answer the following questions:

-What were the terms of the contract between Campbell and the Wentzes?
-Did the Wentzes perform under the contract?
-Did the court find specific performance to be an adequate legal remedy in this case?
-Why did the court refuse to help Campbell in enforcing its legal contract?
-How could Campbell change its contract in the future so as to avoid the unconsionability problem?

Case Study: Campbell Soup Co. v. Wentz172 F.2d 80 (3rd Cir. 1949)Facts: Per a written contract between Campbell Soup Company (a New Jersey company) and the Wentzes (carrot farmers in Pennsylvania), theWentzes would deliver to Campbell all the Chantenay red cored carrots to be grown on the Wentz farm during the 1947 season. The contractprice for the carrots was $30 per ton. The contract between Campbell Soup and all sellers of carrots was drafted by Campbell and it had aprovision that prohibited farmers/sellers from selling their carrots to anyone else, except those carrots that were rejected by Campbell. Thecontract also had a liquidated damages provision of $50 per ton if the seller breached, but it had no similar provision in the event Campbellbreached. The contract not only allowed Campbell to reject nonconforming carrots, but gave Campbell the right to determine who could buy thecarrots it had rejected. The Wentzes harvested 100 tons of carrots, but because the market price at the time of harvesting was $90 per ton for theserare carrots, the Wentzes refused to deliver them to Campbell and sold 62 tons of their carrots to a farmer who sold some of those carrots toCampbell. Campbell sued the Wentzes, asking for the court's order to stop further sale of the contracted carrots to others and to compel specificperformance of the contract. The trial court ruled for the Wentzes and Campbell appealed.
Issues: Is specific performance an appropriate legal remedy in this case or is the contract unconscionable?
Discussion: In January 1948, it was virtually impossible to obtain Chantenay carrots in the open market. Campbell used Chantenay carrots(which are easier to process for soup making than other carrots) in large quantities and furnishes the seeds to farmers with whom it contracts.Campbell contracted for carrots long ahead, and farmers entered into the contract willingly. If the facts of this case were this simple, specificperformance should have been granted.
However, the problem is with the contract itself, which was one-sided. According to the appellate court, the most direct example ofunconscionability was the provision that, under certain circumstances, Campbell may reject carrots, but farmers cannot sell them anywherewithout Campbell's permission. Though the contract was legal, it was wrong for Campbell to ask for the court's help in enforcing thisunconscionable bargain (one that "shocks the conscience of the court"). The court said that the sum of the contract's provisions "drives too hard abargain for a court of conscience to assist."
Holding: The judgment of the trial court in favor of the farmers is affirmed.

1 Attachment
iStockphoto Chapter Overview Learning Objectves After studying this chapter, you will be able to: 1. Describe how third parties acquire rights and duties on a contract. 2. Distinguish between assignments and third-party bene f ciary contracts. 3. Describe what contractual duties may be assigned and delegated. 4. Describe the different ways a contract may be discharged. 5. De f ne the different types of damages. 6. Explain when speci f c performance would be available as a remedy. 6.1 Third Par±ies r! Third-Party Bene f ciaries r! Assignments r! Delegations 6.2 Performance and Discharge of Con±rac±s r! Discharge by Condition r! Discharge by Performance r! Timeliness r! Anticipatory Breach r! Impossibility of Performance r! Commercial Impracticability r! Frustration of Purpose r! Discharge by New Agreement r! Discharge by Operation of Law 6.3 Remedies for Breach r! Damages r! Speci f c Performance r! Election of Remedies 6.4 Chapter Summary r! Focus on Ethics r! Case Study: Rosenberg v. Son, Inc. r! Case Study: Campbell Soup Co. v. Wentz r! Critical Thinking Questions r! Hypothetical Case Problems r! Key Terms Third Par±ies, Performance and Discharge of Con±rac±s, and Remedies 6
Background image of page 01
CHAPTER 6 Section 6.1 Third Parties I n this chapter we will examine several distinct concepts. First, we will look at the role of third parties in contracts. Up to this point, we have been largely concerned with only the two people who made the contract. However, sometimes outsiders who were not a part of the contract may acquire the right to the contract’s benefits, or a duty to perform the contract. The topics of third-party beneficiaries, assignments, and delegations deal with these matters. Second, we will look at the various situations that arise after a valid contract has been made that may result in discharge of the contract. A discharge means that one or both of the contracting parties is excused from performance and/or liability on the contract. Lastly, we will look at the remedies available in the event there is a breach of contract. 6.1 Third Parties W hen considering the role of third parties, we must initially determine if we are focusing on the rights or responsibilities of the contract. If the focus is on the rights or benefits, the ways in which a third party might acquire those are if the outsider is an intended third-party beneficiary or if there has been an assignment of the contract by one of the original contracting parties. An assignment is the transfer of benefits or rights under a contract to a third party. If instead the focus is on whether a third party has a duty to perform on the contract, the issue is whether one of the con- tracting parties has delegated to the outsider. If, for example, John agrees to paint Mary’s house for $1,000, Mary’s rights under the contract would include having her house painted (in a reasonable manner), and John’s rights under the contract would include being paid $1,000 for his labor. If John had, under the original terms of the contract, specified that he wished Mary to pay the $1,000 to Julio, Julio would be an intended third-party beneficiary. Mary would legally be obligated to pay him, and if she did not, it is Julio who would have the right to sue for breach. If, on the other hand, John and Mary make that same contract, and two weeks later John transfers the right to the money to Julio, this is an assignment. Again, Mary is obligated to pay Julio, and if she fails, Julio has the right to sue her, not John. It is important to remem- ber that an assignment is only the transfer of a right, not a duty. In other words, John still has to paint Mary’s house. If John gets Melissa to paint Mary’s house instead of doing it himself, that is a delegation of the contract (see Figure 6.1).
Background image of page 02

End of preview

Answered by Expert Tutors

onec aliquet. Lore

Fusce dui lectus, congue vel laoreet ac, dictum vitae odio. Donec aliquet. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nam lacinia pulvinar tortor nec facilisis. Pellentesque dapibus efficitur laoreet. Nam risus ante, dapibus a molestie consequat, ultrices ac magna. Fusce dui lectus, congue vel la
1 Attachment
campbell.docx
docx
Subject: Business
Get unstuck

442,185 students got unstuck by Course
Hero in the last week

step by step solutions

Our Expert Tutors provide step by step solutions to help you excel in your courses