In the case in the text,Helena Chemical Co.v.Williamson,the court considered many factors in determining whether Williamson was able to seek consequential damages.Which of the following was not one of those factors?
A)Whether the contract provision was unconscionable
B)Whether the contract provision failed its essential purpose
C)Whether Williamson negligently cared for the crops
D)Whether a mere refund would be adequate

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

In this case,the court held that the contract provision was unconscionable and failed its essential purpose.The court went on to explain that a mere refund would be inadequate in the agricultural context because the loss of expected profits due to defective seeds is not compensated by simply replacing or refunding the price of the defective seeds.The court concluded that if Williamson can prove Helena's negligence at trial,he is not prevented by the agreement from seeking consequential damages.

In the Case in the Text,Helena Chemical Co