Select Page

St. Thomas University, Florida School of Law
Makdisi, John Mary

p. 150-170

I. Equitable Action for Buyers of Goods (most cases)

Manchester Dairy System v. Hayward

P entered a contract with D in which D agreed to sell all of the dairy products for P. Each member to pay the P $5 per cow as liquidated damages for any breach through selling milk or dairy products to other buyers. No one could sell dairy to any other buyer. The p’s could not go to the open market and replace any dairy that was not provided by the members.

the contract was ineffective
Every one has to follow the contract or else they could all break it

Each individual depended on everyone as a whole to complete its task.

There is no way the trial could force him to act because it would be to expensive. But the court could force an injunction making him not sell any other milk.
If the defendant defied the court after the injunction then the prison term would be appropriate.

Van Wagner Advertusubg Corp. v. S & M enterprises

Curtice Bros. Co. v. Catts

P made a contract with D to sell his entire tomato crop from a certain land.

Equitible relief is granted to both realty or property. It is treated as the same matter. In this case the court can demand that the tomatoes be sold/
The defendant is made to harvest the crop or someone else can be appointed to due so.

Because D is the breacher, the P is granted the expectation of the contract, his benefit.

Restatement of Contracts, Second
Section 360. Factors Affecting Adequacy of Damages

In determining whether the remedy in damages would be adequate to protect the cepectation interest of the injured party, the following circumstances are significant.

Difficulty of proving damages with reasonable certainty
The difficulty of procuring a suitable substitute performance by means of money awarded as damages
The likelihood that an ward of damages could not be collected.

UCC sectopm 2716(1)

Specific performance may be decreed where the goods are unique or in other proper circumstances.

Paloukos v. Intermountain Chevrolet Co. ( Idaho Supreme Court)

Paloukos paid $120 deposit for a pickup truck worth $3,650. The D returned the deposit saying that there was no more pickup trucks. The P’s claimed equity under the UCC rule. The court denied that the truck was not available for sale or that equitable damages was difficult to figure out. “The court will not order the seller to sell what it does not have.”

Laclede Gas Co. v. Amoco Oil Co.

Laclede contracted with Amoco oil to buy oil from them at an a

n.. The court however found that they do have jurisdiction againstnst a non resident were the land in controversy is situated. Both the land and Plaintiff live in Nebraska.
The d also claimed that there was remedy as found by calculating the market price. But the court said that property is not like chattels specific performance where the performance has to be under special circumstances or uniqueness. Land performance is uniform because the buyer selected that specific piece of property for a reason.

Sept 20th p209-228

Fischer v Union Trust Co.

1) Legal Detrement: The promisee gave up something of value, or circumscribed her liberty in someway.
2) Bargain: The promisor made his promise as part of a bargain; he made his promis in exchange for the promises giving of value.

Warranty deed: A deed containing one or more covenants.
Covenant: Formal agreement
Executory contract: A contract that remains wholly unperformed or for which there remains something still to be done on both sides, often as