Question: Ralston Purina contracted to buy soybeans from McNabb. Poor weather damaged most of the soybeans, making it impossible for McNabb to deliver his crop by the deadline date. Ralston Purina agreed to modify the contract, without additional consideration, to allow delivery at a later date. When McNabb still could not deliver by the new deadline date, Ralston Purina sued for breach of contract based on the new deadline date.
McNabb admitted damages but claimed that Ralston Purina, an experienced purchaser of soybeans, was not acting in good faith when it modified the contract, knowing that the price would rise as the result of the crop failure. McNabb therefore contended that the modification was not good and that the measure of damages claimed by Ralston Purina should be based not on the price as of the new deadline date but on the price of soybeans as of the date McNabb originally agreed to furnish the soybeans but failed to do so. Do you agree? (Ralston Purina Co. v. McNabb, 381 F. Supp. 181)