Recker answered by admitting the failure to deliver but argued that he was excused from performance by the destruction of part of his crop. Explain which party should prevail.
In August, Bunge Corporation, a grain dealer, and Recker, a farmer, entered into a written contract under which Recker agreed to sell to Bunge Corporation ten thousand bushels of No. 2 yellow soybeans to be grown in the United States at $3.35 per bushel. Delivery of the grain was to be made at Bunge Corporation’s place of business, Price’s Landing, Missouri, during January of the following year. Nothing in the contract required Recker to grow the beans on his own land, to grow the beans himself, or to operate a farm. The contract also provided that Bunge Corporation could extend the time of delivery. Severe winter weather struck the southeastern Missouri area in the early part of January, making it impossible for Recker to harvest approximately 865 acres of his beans. Agents of Bunge Corporation visited Recker’s farm in mid-January and observed that the beans were unharvestable. Shortly thereafter, Bunge Corporation directed a letter to Recker, calling attention to the fact that the 10,000 bushels of beans due under the contract had not been delivered. By the same communication, Bunge Corporation extended the time for delivery to March 31. From January 31 to March 31, the market price of beans increased by 10 percent. When delivery was not made by March 31, Bunge Corporation commenced an action to recover damages for breach of contract. Recker answered by admitting the failure to deliver but argued that he was excused from performance by the destruction of part of his crop. Explain which party should prevail.
As per the record, Individual R, by failing to deliver 10,000 bushels of beans, did not perform as per the decided terms of the contract. The destruction of crops by the forces of nature is the reason behind the non-delivery by Individual R. So, as a result, Corporation B should prevail.