Samuelson Case Summary

Words: 365
Pages: 2

4.
I think he was overcompensated for foolish spending. According to Samuelson, "A buyer, however, only gets consequential damages for harm that was unavoidable." (Samuelson, 490) He wanted to get a Prowler but since the contract was canceled, he paid $77,706 to get another Prowler. However, his demand of the car can be replaced by another car. His choice to pay $77,706 is not unavoidable. He could have got a more reasonable car. Samuelson also mentions that, once Gallery agree to sell to Trisha an original painting, Gallery must deliver the painting to Trisha because the painting cannot be replaced. It is special performance rule (Samuelson, 491). In case of the senario, the seller said that the seller wouldn't be allotted any Prowlers. It seems that Prowler is rare, but he could find and get Prowler at the final. Therefore, he could replace his desire. Since Prowler can be replaced, special performance
…show more content…
Samuelson mentions that, "A seller who does not resell, or who resells unreasonably, may recover the difference between the original contract price and the market value of the goods at the time of delivery." (Samuelson, 488) If sellers don't try to sell immediately after being rejected their goods by buyers, the rule is fair. However, if sellers cannot find any buyer immediately, this rule isn't fair. Oilko has prepared for deliverly but suddenly Refinery rejected. Let say Oilkohas bought the oil to sell at the market value and buyers rejected the goods. However the market value of the oil decrease, Oilko would get lots of damages. Since Samuelson doesn't expalin whether Oilko has tired to sell the oils as soon as the oil was rejected or not, I don't know whether Oilko just has kept the oil until Feburary 2. If sellers don't try to resell immediately, this rule is fair. On the other hand, if sellers try to find new buyer but cannot find it, this rule isn't fair because when a market value of a good decrease, sellers would get damage due to