In two recent cases, prospective purchasers entered into written contracts with local automobile distributors for the purchase of new cars. Because of the scarcity of new cars, the prospective purchasers' names were put on waiting lists establishing a priority for delivery as new cars were received by the distributors. In both cases the distributors refused without excuse to perform when cars became available for delivery. The prospective purchasers sought specific performance on the basis that the current scarcity of new cars and the difficulty of obtaining them elsewhere for cash alone made the legal damage remedy inadequate. Held, (a) specific performance granted. Heidner v. Hewitt Chevrolet Co., (Kan. 1948) 199 P. (2d) 481, (b) specific performance denied. McCallister v. Patton, (Ark. 1948) 215 S.W. (2d) 701.
Richard H. Conn,
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE-SCARCITY AS JUSTIFICATION FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF NEW CAR,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol47/iss7/27