## Facts

- Curtice Brothers Company operated a tomato-canning factory with approximately one million cans of capacity and a canning season of about six weeks.
- The company had to secure cans, equipment, and labor in advance and planned production based on contracted tomato acreage and expected yields.
- James E. Catts, a tomato grower, contracted to sell Curtice Bros. the entire tomato crop produced from specified land.
- After Curtice Bros. made season-specific commitments in reliance on the expected crop, Catts refused to deliver and sought or threatened to sell the tomatoes elsewhere.
- Curtice Bros. alleged that substitute tomatoes could not be reliably obtained in the needed quantity, quality, and time during the short canning season, threatening the operation of the plant.

## Issues

1. Whether a court of equity may decree specific performance of a contract for the sale of personal property (the entire crop from specified land) when the legal remedy is inadequate.
2. Whether money damages provide an adequate remedy for breach of a seasonal crop-supply contract supporting a time-compressed manufacturing operation.

## Decision

- The Court of Chancery advised a decree for Curtice Bros., granting equitable relief to enforce the crop-delivery obligation.
- The court held that specific performance may be ordered for contracts involving personal property when no adequate remedy at law exists.
- The court concluded that damages were inadequate because the buyer might be unable to procure tomatoes of the required quality and quantity at the time needed, risking failure of the seasonal operation.
- The decree included protective equitable measures, including restraining disposition of the crop to others, with practical enforcement mechanisms (such as receivership) available if needed.

## Legal Principles

- The standards governing specific performance are the same in principle for real property and personal property; the controlling question is the adequacy of the legal remedy.
- Courts typically deny specific performance for chattels because market substitution often makes damages sufficient, but that presumption yields when substitution is not reasonably available.
- Specific performance is appropriate when breach would cause injury not compensable by damages, including inability to obtain substitute goods at the required time, in the required quantity and quality, for the buyer’s operation.
- Output-type contracts tied to a particular crop may be specifically enforced when the buyer’s seasonal planning and reliance make the promised supply effectively irreplaceable for that period.

## Conclusion

The court enforced an executory crop-output contract in equity because the buyer’s short seasonal canning operation depended on timely delivery and could not be adequately protected by damages where substitute supply was uncertain or unavailable.


Curtice Bros. Co. v. Catts, 72 N.J. Eq. 831, 66 A. 935 (N.J. Ch. 1907)