Vendor's Sale of Identified Good to Third Party Following Prior Contract

A vendor of used goods contracted to sell a specific item to a buyer, but later, before delivery, the vendor sold the identical item to a third party who was unaware of the prior agreement. The original buyer sued the vendor for breach of contract and damages, and the lower court ruled against the buyer, finding the vendor was not obligated to deliver the specific item since the contract was for the sale of a generic good within a class, despite the initial identification, and thus the vendor was only liable for damages, not specific performance. The highest court dismissed the appeal, reasoning that the initial agreement, though referring to a specific identified item, did not constitute a definitive transfer of ownership or mandate specific delivery when the object was still part of a fungible stock, thereby upholding the lower court's finding that the contract was for an exchange of an item within a category, not the specific identified item, and the vendor's subsequent sale to another did not constitute a direct breach justifying specific performance against the original buyer.