Sechrest Plywood Company contracted with Forest Furniture Company to sell it plywood bottoms for drawers that Forest would manufacture. After the contract was signed, Forest’s warehouse, where it intended to make the drawers, was completely destroyed by a fire. Forest asserted that the contract was void due to impossibility. Sechrest argued that while the fire prevented Forest from manufacturing drawers, it did not prevent Forest from purchasing the plywood bottoms for which it had contracted with Sechrest. Therefore, Sechrest argued,

the doctrine of impossibility did not apply.

CASE QUESTIONS

1. What are the standards for being discharged through impossibility?

2. Do they apply here? Why or why not?