13. If the store sues the customer for breach of contract, the store will probably recover

C is correct. Under the UCC, where the buyer has repudiated a contract the seller may, if resale is done in accordance with UCC rules (which among other things requires giving notice to buyer of any private resale), recover the difference between the contract price and the resale price, plus any incidental damages. In the alternative, the seller may recover the difference between the contract price and the market price at the time for tender. Where the market formula of damages is inadequate, the seller may recover its lost profit on the sale (plus incidental damages), if the seller can demonstrate that it could have profitably made the extra sale had the contract gone forward (i.e., that it is a «lost volume» seller). When the customer repudiated the contract to buy the computer from the store, the store resold the computer to a different buyer for the same contract price. Because the store did not give notice of resale to the customer, it may not rely on the resale formula in calculating damages, but this will have no effect on damages because the resale and the contract price are the same. But because the store can obtain more units than it can sell at retail, this suggests that the store is a «lost volume» seller and therefore can recover the profit it expected to earn on the contract, plus incidental damages.

A is incorrect. The UCC allows recovery of lost profit, as explained above.

B is incorrect. Failure to give notice of resale does not completely cut off the seller's right to recover damages.

D is incorrect. The UCC formula requires subtracting from the contract price the value of the good to be sold (regardless of the nature of the repudiation).