Case Analysis Unit 5

Millie’s Farm

Millie owns a farm. Frank needs 10,000 bushels of corn. Millie and Frank enter into a contract in which Millie agrees to grow the 10,000 bushels of corn on her form. After they have signed the contract, a severe drought during growing season presents big problems. Due to the drought, Millie is only able to deliver on 250 bushels of corn to Frank. He took the amount of corn she had available but did sue Millie for breach of contract. Because the drought was out of Millie’s power and she could not foresee this problem when she signed the contract? Did she breach the contract or is there another legal answer?

Impossibility of performance is defined by Miller and Jentz (2008) as performance becoming objectively impossible. If impossibility of performance is found to be the case, the contract can be discharged. Objective impossibility must be distinguished in court from subjective impossibility (Miller & Jentz, 2008). Objective would mean “it is impossible for anyone” versus subjective “it is impossible for me”.

There are three situations when impossibility of performance can be used as a valid defense against breach of contract (Miller & Jentz, 2008). They are as follows:

1. When a party essential to contract completion dies or becomes incapacitated prior to performance.

2. When the specified subject matter is destroyed.

3. When a change of law/statute renders the performance of the contract illegal.

Courts might also excuse performance obligations if/when performance of the contract becomes extremely more difficult or expensive than understood at the time a contract is formed by two parties (Miller & Jentz, 2008). According to Miller and Jentz (2008), for the party to successfully invoke this doctrine of commercial impracticability, the contracted or expected performance must be proven extremely difficult or costly which was not the case or known by either party when the original contract was put in place.

I believe that due to...