Campbell Soup Co. v. Wentz - 172 F.2d 80 (3d Cir. 1948)

A corporation entered into a written contract with farmers for the deliveryof certain types of carrots grown on fifteen acres of a farm during the 1947 season. The prices specified in the contract ranged from $ 23 to $ 30 per ton. After harvest,farmers told the corporation that they would not deliver their carrots at the contract price because the market price at that time was at least $ 90 per ton, and such carrots were virtually unobtainable.The farmersthen sold a majority of their carrots to a new buyer, a neighboring farmer. The corporation, suspecting thatthe buyer was selling the carrots covered by the previous contract, refused to purchase any more, and instituted suit againstthe farmers and the new buyer to enjoin further sale of the contract carrots to others and to compel specific performance of the contract. The trial court denied equitable relief. The corporation sought review.

1) Did the Appellate court agree with the lower court that this was not a case where specific performance would be awarded in this case if this were a valid contract and not one-sided?

2) Do you agree with the lower court or the Appellate court as to whether this would have been a proper case for specific performance if this were a valid contract and not an unconscionable contract? Why or why not.

3) If the farmer could sell the carrots that were rejected by Campbell company to whomever he chose to sell them for without authorization from Campbell Company, would the court be concerned that the parties contracted for $30 a ton and the price at the market time went you $90 a time? Why or why not.