Curtice Bros. v. Catts
72 N.J. Eq. 831 (1907)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A court of equity will grant specific performance for a contract for the sale of chattels if the legal remedy of damages is inadequate. The legal remedy is considered inadequate when the goods are essential for the buyer's unique business operations and cannot be readily replaced on the open market, such that a breach would cause irreparable injury.
Facts:
- A complainant operates a tomato canning factory with a capacity of approximately one million cans.
- The factory's packing season is condensed, lasting only about six weeks per year.
- The complainant made extensive preparations for the season, including securing labor and equipment, based on its plant capacity.
- To ensure an adequate supply of tomatoes for its planned pack, the complainant entered into contracts with various growers, including the defendant, for the output of a specific acreage.
- The defendant, one of the contracted growers, refused to deliver the tomatoes as agreed upon in the contract.
- Due to market conditions, the complainant was unable to procure tomatoes of the required quality and quantity at the time they were needed to meet its operational demands.
Procedural Posture:
- The complainant (the factory) filed a bill in a court of equity against the defendant (the grower).
- The complainant sought a decree of specific performance to compel the defendant to honor the contract for the sale of tomatoes.
- The facts of the case were stipulated to by both parties for the court's consideration.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a court of equity have the power to grant specific performance for a contract for the sale of chattels when the breach would cause irreparable harm to the buyer's business because the goods are not readily replaceable on the open market and are essential for the business's unique operational needs?
Opinions:
Majority - Beaming, Y. C.
Yes. A court of equity has the power to grant specific performance for a contract for the sale of chattels when the legal remedy is inadequate. The general presumption against specific performance for chattels is overcome when a breach causes irreparable injury. Here, the complainant's business is extraordinary; its success depends entirely on pre-arranged conditions for a short, six-week packing season. The contracted tomatoes are essential to the economic operation of the plant. The inability to procure substitute tomatoes on the open market at the required time means that money damages would be inadequate to compensate for the disruption and potential failure of the entire season's operations. This situation is fundamentally different from an ordinary sale of merchandise, as the breach by even one grower jeopardizes the factory's ability to operate successfully. Therefore, restraining the defendant from selling the crop to others and compelling performance is a proper exercise of equitable power.
Analysis:
This case significantly clarifies the 'inadequacy of legal remedy' doctrine for specific performance of contracts involving personal property (chattels). It expands the concept of 'uniqueness' from goods that are inherently rare, like artwork, to goods that are functionally unique to the buyer's specific business needs. The decision establishes that courts will look beyond the nature of the goods themselves and consider the entire commercial context, including the buyer's operational model and market realities. This precedent empowers courts to grant equitable relief in commercial supply contracts where a breach would cause a cascade of operational failures that cannot be easily quantified or compensated by money damages.
