Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 2-716
Oklahoma Code Comment
There is scant previous authority in Oklahoma on the question of specific performance of a sales contract. In the only two cases found, relief was denied because the chattels involved, merchandise and an automobile, were not unique, and the remedy at law was adequate. Fortner v. Wilson, 202 Okl. 563, 216 P.2d 299 (1950); Flechs v. Richie, 91 Okl. 95, 216 P. 644 (1923).
(1) This section goes much beyond the previous Oklahoma view, permitting specific performance "in other proper circumstances." It is the frank purpose of the drafters to depart from the rigid rules of "unique" and "inadequate remedy at law." Thus, specific performance could be granted if the chattel was difficult to purchase on the open market, such as were automobiles following World War II, of output contracts, or other circumstances which the court felt justified the equitable remedy.
(2) There are no previous Oklahoma decisions.
(3) Previously in Oklahoma, replevin could be had only of property to which the plaintiff had title, or a legal interest therein such as a mortgage thereon. 12 Okl.St.Ann. § 1572(2). Thus, this section expands Oklahoma law. This rule is, in reality, more in the nature of specific performance and there is no reason to believe that specific performance would not in fact be granted under paragraph (1) under the circumstances recited in paragraph (2).