Which legal doctrine applies when crops are destroyed before the risk of loss passes to the buyer?

The correct answer relates to the principle of commercial impracticability under the UCC, which can apply when unforeseen circumstances significantly alter the way a contract must be fulfilled, making performance exceptionally difficult or costly. When crops are destroyed before the risk of loss passes to the buyer, the seller may find themselves unable to deliver the contracted goods, which can be considered an event that makes performance commercially impractical.

Under the UCC, if the seller cannot fulfill the contract due to a unforeseen circumstance, such as the complete destruction of the crops, the seller may be excused from their obligation to deliver those goods because the risk has not yet transferred to the buyer. This allows the seller to avoid liability for nonperformance due to circumstances that are beyond their control, thus upholding the principle of fair dealing.

The other choices don't adequately cover the situation where the crop destruction occurs prior to the transfer of risk. Firm contracts remaining enforced despite loss does not consider the impact of risk on the parties' obligations. While partial losses may lead to some level of compensation, that would not relate directly to the context of total crop destruction. Finally, stating that only complete crop failures excuse performance does not reflect the nuances provided by the doctrine of commercial impracticability, as it fails to