Chuck agreed to sell a widget to Tawny.Under the terms of that contract, she was required to pay $50 000 on May 1 and he was required to deliver the widget to her by June 1.The contract also stated that, regardless of possession, property in the widget would not pass to Tawny until she paid the full price.Tawny failed to pay $50 000 on May 1.However, on May 2, she introduced Chuck to Brandi, who was willing to buy the same widget for $45 000.Chuck insists that Tawny is still required to pay $50 000.Tawny, in contrast, argues that she only has to pay $5000 and that Chuck is required to act reasonably by selling the widget to Brandi for $45 000.Chuck's argument is correct and Tawny's argument is incorrect.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Tawny's failure to pay the full price on May 1 resulted in the property in the widget not passing to her. This means that Chuck still owns the widget and can sell it to someone else. However, Tawny is still liable for the full price of $50,000 as per the terms of the contract. Chuck is not required to sell the widget to Brandi for $45,000, as his obligation is only to deliver the widget to Tawny upon full payment.

Chuck Agreed to Sell a Widget to Tawny