Campbell soup co v wentz

Read the Case Campbell Soup Co. v. Wentz in the text. Answer the following questions:

What were the terms of the contract between Campbell and the Wentzes?
Did the Wentzes perform under the contract?
Did the court find specific performance to be an adequate legal remedy in this case?
Why did the court refuse to help Campbell in enforcing its legal contract?
How could Campbell change its contract in the future so as to avoid the unconsionability problem?
CASE STUDY: CAMPBELL SOUP CO. V. WENTZ
172 F.2D 80 (3RD CIR. 1949)
Facts: Per a written contract betweenCampbell Soup Company (a New Jersey company) and the Wentzes (carrot farmers inPennsylvania), the Wentzes would deliver toCampbell all the Chantenay red cored carrots to be grown on the Wentz farm duringthe 1947 season. The contract price for the carrots was $30 per ton. The contract betweenCampbell Soup and all sellers of carrotswas drafted byCampbell and it had a provision that prohibited farmers/sellers from selling their carrots to anyone else, exceptthose carrots that were rejected byCampbell. The contract also had a liquidated damages provision of $50 per ton if the sellerbreached, but it had no similar provision in the eventCampbell breached. The contract not only allowedCampbell to rejectnonconforming carrots, but gaveCampbell the right to determine who could buy the carrots it had rejected. The Wentzes harvested100 tons of carrots, but because the market price at the time of harvesting was $90 per ton for these rare carrots, the Wentzesrefused to deliver them toCampbell and sold 62 tons of their carrots to a farmer who sold some of those carrots toCampbell.Campbell sued the Wentzes, asking for the court's order to stop further sale of the contracted carrots to others and to compelspecific performance of the contract. The trial court ruled for the Wentzes andCampbell appealed.