Equity does not enforce unconscionable bargains.
A corporation entered into a written contract with farmers for the delivery of 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 farmers then sold a majority of their carrots to a new buyer, a neighboring farmer. The corporation, suspecting that the buyer was selling the carrots covered by the previous contract, refused to purchase any more, and instituted suit against the 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.
Can a party to a contract demand specific performance in all circumstances where the contract was for the sale of goods?
The Court held that the corporation was not entitled to specific performance under the contract because the contract was too one-sided to grant equitable relief, because even though the farmers clearly breached the contract, other remedies were unavailable.