Woollums v Horsley

Facts
Woollums, an uneducated rural farmer, sells mineral rights on his land to Horsley, a sophisticated businessman, in 1887for $.40/acre
Supposedly neither party knows whether minerals were actually in the land, or the real value of Woollum's land, but Horsley and not Woollums knows that there are valuable minerals on surrounding land; Horsley also knows that railroads are being built nearby (that can transport the minerals)
Horsley assures Woollums that W would "never be bothered by the railroad in his lifetime"
Woollums never delivers a deed to Horsley
The mineral rights were probably worth $15/acre in 1889
Horsley sues for specific performance

Analysis

Woollum's contract with Horsley is unconscionable and thus unenforceable. Note that the court allows Horsley to recover the down payment he made for the land (I.e., restitution damages). Note also that Horsley could afterwards sue Woollums at law on the contract for expectation damages (the difference between the market price of the land mineral rights and the contractual rights); at the same time, a suit on the contract would require a local (and thus presumably unfriendly) KY jury.

See generally unconscionability