Fred Dare Appliances, Inc., sold a $2,000 refrigerator to Harriet Pool. Per the terms of the agreement, the buyer was to pick up the appliance on July 1 and pay for it in full before taking possession. July 1 came and went, and the buyer did not appear. Fred Dare, the owner of the store, is certain that Pool breached the contract. Dare has a plan. His best friend, Sam Unger, desperately needs a new refrigerator, but he cannot currently afford one at full retail price. In fact, Unger only has $200. Fred plans to sell the refrigerator to Unger for $200 and then send a bill for $1,800 to Pool. (The $1,800 represents the difference between the price of the refrigerator in Fred Dare Appliances' contract with Pool and the resale price of $200 to Unger.) Fred's reasoning is that Pool breached the contract and that he is simply exercising his resale right. Fred's brother-in-law, an attorney, once told him that if a customer breaks a purchase contract, the seller has the right to resell the goods to a substitute buyer and then recover any damages from the original, breaching buyer

• Which Plaintiff was most wronged by a breach of contract? In your judgment, did this particular plaintiff's remedy seem sufficient? Did the Plaintiff benefit from the application of the UCC, or would the Plaintiff have had a greater remedy under the common law of contracts?