Week 2 Bus311
Discussion 1
Elements of a Contract
Read the Case Campbell Soup Co. v. Wentz in the text. Answer the following questions:
1. What were the terms of the contract between Campbell and the Wentzes?
2. Did the Wentzes perform under the contract?
3. Did the court find specific performance to be an adequate legal remedy in this case?
4. Why did the court refuse to help Campbell in enforcing its legal contract?
5. How could Campbell change its contract in the future so as to avoid the unconsionability problem?
Guided Response: Review your peer’s responses. Respond to at least two of your classmates’ letting them know if you agree with their analysis. Legal analysis is fact driven. If your analysis of the facts is different from a peer’s response, list the facts that led you to your conclusion. Did your peer give more weight to facts that you found unimportant?
1. Basically the Wentzes' can only sale these rare carrots to Campbell Co., except for the carrots that Campbell reject. But even the ones that are rejected Campbell still makes the decision as to who will purchase the rejected carrots.
2. No the Wentzes' did not abide by the terms of the contract, which means they breached contract with Campbell Soup Co. The terms of contract was, that they cannot sell to another farmer, and that is exactly what happen.
3. Yes, because Campbell gave the farmers under contract Tyne seeds to grow the rare carrots. But the contract was one-sided, Campbell prohibited farmers from selling the carrots to other consumers. If the farmers wanted to sell the carrots to others, they had to get permission from Campbell. Then Campbell will decide if the farmers can sell to this outside buyer.
4. Because if the provisions of the contract, which gave Campbell all the rights and the farmers nothing. The only thing the farmers get is a percentage for growing the carrots. For the court, the terms of the contract made by Campbell...