Warning

Info

Table of Contents
Okapi13, SLS '24 |

0 0

Back to briefs

Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts

(1907)

New Jersey Court of Chancery - 72 N.J.Eq. 831, 72 N.J. Eq. 831

tl;dr:

A cannery needs a shipment of tomatoes and gets an order for specific performance of their contract to buy tomatoes because there is no other equitable remedy available.

Video Summary


Case Summary

In a 1907 case called Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts, the New Jersey Court of Chancery looked at a contract issue involving a tomato canning business and a farmer. The case took place at the state trial level due to a request for specific performance, a legal term meaning the court orders someone to fulfill their contractual obligations.

Curtice Brothers Co. (the canning company) had a deal with Mr. Catts (the farmer) to buy all the tomatoes from his land at a set price per bushel. Relying on this, the company got ready for their six-week canning season by hiring workers and securing supplies and transport. However, Catts didn't deliver the tomatoes, claiming he'd sold his land and the new owner wasn't tied to the contract.

The Court of Chancery decided in favor of Curtice Brothers Co. They ruled that simply paying damages wouldn't be enough, as the business couldn't find replacement tomatoes in time. Instead the court granted specific performance so Catts had to provide the tomatoes.

The fact that the contract had clear terms (quantity, quality, price, and delivery dates) meant it could be enforced. Lastly, the court dismissed Catts' argument about selling his land because he hadn't told or asked the company about it.

This case demonstrates how courts use specific performance in contract disputes and how they examine factors like damages, alternatives, term certainty, and changes in circumstances. It's important for anyone dealing with contracts to know their rights if there's a breach or potential breach.

ICRAIssue, Conclusion, Rule, Analysis for Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Facts & HoldingCurtice Brothers Co. v. Catts case brief facts & holding

Facts:Defendant Catts agreed to sell tomatoes to Plaintiff Curtice Brothers...

Holding:Specific performance was granted, enjoining Catts to fulfill their end...

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition

Font size -+
Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts | Case Brief DeepDive
Majority opinion, author: Beaming, Y. C.
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

Courts of equity will decree specific performance of contracts related to personal property if no adequate remedy at law exists. However, equitable relief is withheld for contracts related to personalty as damages are easily ascertainable and recoverable at law. The jurisdiction is discretionary, and agreements for the sale of land are presumed to come within their operation, while a contrary presumption exists for agreements concerning chattels. The US Supreme Court has enforced specific performance of contracts relating to personalty, and courts will scrutinize such contracts more closely than those relating to land. In New Jersey, contracts for the sale of chattels have been frequently enforced based on the inadequacy of the remedy at law, depending on the characteristic features of the contract or peculiar situation and needs of the parties. In the case in question, the complainant's factory has a capacity of one million cans of tomatoes, and a breach of the contract leaves the factory helpless to procure the necessary tomatoes to operate successfully. The breach causes irreparable injury, and the situation is extraordinary.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

LSD+ Case Briefs

Features

  • DeepDive for detailed case analysis
  • Over 50,000 existing case briefs
  • Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
  • Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
  • Social learning with chat and high points

Over 50,000 Cases Briefed

LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.

14-Day Free Trial

Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.

Integrated Legal Dictionary

Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.

Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.

DeepDive

DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.

Brief anything. Instantly.

Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.

Social Learning with Chat and High Points

Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.

Real-Time Brief Feedback

Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.

Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts

Chat for Curtice Brothers Co. v. Catts
brief-122
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.