Fess, a farmer, contracted to sell his cabbage crop to Chris C. for $475, the contract being made one week before the harvest. The contract was oral. After the harvest Fess quickly sold the crop to Don Trump instead for $700 when Trump called and offered to pay immediately that day. C threatened to sue Fess for breach. Could he win and what laws apply?

To determine whether Chris C. could win a lawsuit for breach of contract against Fess, we need to consider the laws that govern oral contracts and the concept of anticipatory breach.

1. Oral Contracts: In most jurisdictions, oral contracts are legally enforceable, but they can be more challenging to prove compared to written contracts. However, the absence of a written contract does not automatically invalidate the agreement.

2. Anticipatory Breach: Anticipatory breach occurs when one party clearly indicates that they will not fulfill their contractual obligations before performance is due. In this case, Fess selling the crop to Don Trump instead of Chris C. could be considered an anticipatory breach if it can be established that Fess's actions constituted a clear refusal to perform the contract.

The outcome of a lawsuit for breach of contract will depend on various factors, including the specific laws of the jurisdiction in question. However, some general considerations apply:

A. Validity of the Oral Contract: The first issue to establish would be whether the oral contract between Fess and Chris C. is legally valid. This requires determining if all elements necessary for a valid contract were present, such as an offer, acceptance, and consideration (i.e., the agreed-upon price).

B. Anticipatory Breach: If the court finds the oral contract to be valid, Chris C. would need to prove that Fess's actions in quickly selling to Don Trump constituted an anticipatory breach. This would require demonstrating that Fess clearly and unequivocally refused to perform the contract with Chris C. If successful, Chris C. may be entitled to damages resulting from the breach.

C. Validity of Fess's Actions: It may also be relevant to assess whether Fess had a valid reason for selling to Don Trump instead of fulfilling the contract with Chris C. Depending on the circumstances, Fess's actions could be justified if Chris C. failed to fulfill their obligations under the contract or if there were any other legal justifications for Fess's decision.

It is important to note that the specific laws and legal principles pertaining to oral contracts and anticipatory breach can vary between jurisdictions. To obtain a definitive answer tailored to this particular case, it is advisable to consult an attorney familiar with contract law in the relevant jurisdiction.