Choice "B" is correct. Good's statement constituted an anticipatory repudiation (i.e., an unequivocal statement that the party would not perform). Anticipatory repudiation is an immediate breach, and it gives the nonbreaching party several options, including the option to treat the contract as being breached, reselling the goods, and recovering the difference between the contract price and the resale price.
Choice "d" is incorrect. Good's statement constituted an anticipatory repudiation (i.e., an unequivocal statement that the party would not perform). In an anticipatory repudiation situation, the nonrepudiating party has the option of treating the repudiation as an immediate breach; it need not wait until the original date of performance. Thus, Mazur does not have to wait until June 23 to resell the goods.
Choice "c" is incorrect. A party who breaches through anticipatory repudiation can revoke its repudiation only if the norepudiating party does not change its position in reliance on the repudiation. Here, Mazur changes its position by reselling the wheat on June 2. Thus, Good's ability to revoke its anticipatory repudiation was cut off on June 2.
Choice "a" is incorrect. Since the goods are not unique or special, the remedy known as specific performance would not be available. Additionally, since Good (buyer) is the one who breached the contract he/she cannot successfully sue.