Uniform Commercial Code

807 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 268 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., Inc.
  336 So. 2d 80· Fla.· 1976-07-21 ·cited 444×
  Florida Supreme Court adopts the doctrine of strict liability in tort for defective products, extending liability to both users and foreseeable bystanders. The court holds that contributory negligence is not a defense when based on failure to discover defects, but ordinary lack o
• Johnson Enters. OF Jacksonville, Inc. v. FPL Grp., Inc.
  162 F.3d 1290· 11th Cir.· 1998-12-18 ·cited 104×
  Johnson Enterprises of Jacksonville, Inc. (JEJ) sued Telesat Cablevision, Inc., FPL Group, Inc., and FPL Group Capital, Inc. for breach of contract, fraud, RICO violations, and various tort claims arising from a cable television construction contract dispute. JEJ alleged that Tel
• Riggs v. Aurora Loan Servs., LLC
  36 So. 3d 932· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-06-16 ·cited 103×
  Aurora Loan Services sought to foreclose a mortgage and obtained summary judgment by establishing it was the lawful holder of the promissory note. The court affirmed, holding that Aurora's possession of the original note with a blank indorsement, supported by affidavits, was suff
• Libby v. City Nat'l Bank
  592 F.2d 504· 9th Cir.· 1978-11-28 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction for the interpleader action and vacated that judgment. It also found that certain suppliers' claims did not meet the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction. The court reversed the finding of breach of contract a
• Lubbock Feed Lots, Inc. v. Iowa Beef Processors, Inc.
  630 F.2d 250· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-10 ·cited 87×
  The court held that feedlot operators, acting as agents with an interest in the contract and as party promisees, are the real parties in interest under Texas law and thus have standing to sue the packer for unpaid cattle purchases.
• Coenen v. R. W. Pressprich & Co., Inc.
  453 F.2d 1209· 2d Cir.· 1972-01-12 ·cited 87×
  A claim arising under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and antitrust claims are subject to arbitration under the New York Stock Exchange Constitution when the agreement to arbitrate is made after the dispute arises and involves disputes between members.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Wood
  758 F.2d 156· 6th Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 82×
  The FDIC, acting in its corporate capacity and acquiring a note in good faith as part of a purchase and assumption transaction, takes the note free of personal defenses like usury, even if state law would otherwise disallow it.
• State v. Fam. Bank OF Hallandale
  623 So. 2d 474· Fla.· 1993-07-01 ·cited 79×
  The Florida Supreme Court holds that state treasury warrants are not negotiable instruments under the Uniform Commercial Code despite their formal characteristics, and that a bank holding such a warrant is not a holder in due course entitled to payment free of the state's defense
• Brown v. Avemco Inv. Corp.
  603 F.2d 1367· 9th Cir.· 1979-09-12 ·cited 76×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority opinion improperly reversed the lower court's decision by considering issues not properly raised on appeal and by disregarding the requirements of Rule 51, FRCivP, regarding timely objections to jury instructions.
• Gable v. Silver
  258 So. 2d 11· Fla. 4th DCA· 1972-01-14 ·cited 73×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal held that implied warranties of fitness and merchantability extend to the sale of new condominiums by builder-vendors, reversing the historical common law rule of caveat emptor. This was a case of first impression in Florida involving defectiv
• Neville Chem. Co. v. Union Carbide Corp.
  422 F.2d 1205· 3d Cir.· 1970-02-06 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the jury's findings of negligence and breach of warranty were supported by sufficient evidence, and that the contract did not effectively disclaim liability for the resulting odor problem.
• FOX Valley Harvestore, Inc. v. A. O. Smith Harvestore Prods., Inc.
  545 F.2d 1096· 7th Cir.· 1976-12-07 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate an inadequate remedy at law.
• Love v. United States
  871 F.2d 1488· 9th Cir.· 1989-04-06 ·cited 61×
  The court held that the Loves' claims for conversion and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing are cognizable under the FTCA, and their claim against individual officials for denial of due process is a valid Bivens claim.
• In re Samuels & Co., Inc. v. Mahon
  526 F.2d 1238· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-17 ·cited 58×
  The court held that C.I.T. was not a good faith purchaser for value because it had intimate knowledge of the debtor's financial affairs and the outstanding claims of the cattle sellers, and thus its lien rights were derivative of the debtor's, which terminated upon non-payment.
• Shirley v. State Nat'l Bank OF Conn.
  493 F.2d 739· 2d Cir.· 1974-02-14 ·cited 58×·via Uniform Commercial Code § 9-503
  The court held that the private repossession of property, even if authorized by common law or statute, constitutes state action when it involves a unilateral taking without consent, thus requiring due process protections.
• Pritchard v. Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co.
  350 F.2d 479· 3d Cir.· 1965-07-26 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the jury instructions were inadequate regarding the requirements of Section 12 of the Sales Act, specifically concerning express warranties and the necessity of buyer reliance.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Elliott
  953 F.2d 1556· 11th Cir.· 1992-02-27 ·cited 54×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The Eleventh Circuit certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question whether Florida tax certificates constitute interests in land excluded from Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, or personal property general intangibles requiring financing statement perfection. Credit
• In re Xonics, Inc. v. First Wis. Fin. Corp.
  813 F.2d 127· 7th Cir.· 1987-02-26 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court lost jurisdiction over the dispute once the property was abandoned by the estate, and that appellate jurisdiction exists if the dispute's resolution affects other creditors' recoveries under the reorganization plan.
• Agrashell, Inc. v. Bernard Sirotta Co.
  344 F.2d 583· 2d Cir.· 1965-04-06 ·cited 50×
• Weiner v. Am. Petrofina Mktg., Inc.
  482 So. 2d 1362· Fla.· 1986-02-06 ·cited 48×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a secured creditor may obtain a deficiency judgment even after disposing of collateral in a commercially unreasonable manner, but established a presumption that the collateral's fair market value equals the total debt, shifting the burden to th
• S. C. Loveland, Inc. v. E. W. Towing, Inc.
  608 F.2d 160· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-12 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed the lower court's apportionment of fault and finding of liability, including the State of Florida's comparative negligence for failing to take reasonable steps to prevent the collision.
• Michael-Regan Co., Inc. v. Lindell
  527 F.2d 653· 9th Cir.· 1975-08-06 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the contract provision for attorney fees and interest applied to the breach of warranty action and the award of inventory value was supported by evidence, but the 12% interest rate was not contractually agreed upon and should be the legal rate.
• James v. Pinnix
  495 F.2d 206· 5th Cir.· 1974-06-10 ·cited 48×·via Uniform Commercial Code § 9-503
  The court held that the self-help repossession of collateral by a secured creditor under Mississippi Code § 9-503 does not constitute state action, and therefore does not give rise to a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• GAF Corp. v. The Zack Co.
  445 So. 2d 350· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-01-17 ·cited 45×
  GAF Corporation appeals a jury verdict awarding damages to Zack Company, a roofing contractor, for losses incurred when GAF's defective roofing materials caused structural failures on two projects. The court reverses, holding that Zack sustained no personal injury or property dam
• Bichel Optical Labs., Inc. v. The Marquette Nat'l Bank OF Minneapolis
  487 F.2d 906· 8th Cir.· 1973-11-07 ·cited 44×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that a bank's seizure of a borrower's funds and collateral under a loan agreement, even if authorized by state statute, does not constitute state action for purposes of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim.
• State OF Pa. v. Curtiss Nat'l Bank OF Miami Springs
  427 F.2d 395· 5th Cir.· 1970-06-04 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the bank's issuance of a cashier's check constituted an unconditional obligation, and the bank could not stop payment due to a failure of consideration related to separate underlying transactions. The court also affirmed summary judgment against a third-party
• Teradyne, Inc. v. Mostek Corp.
  797 F.2d 43· 1st Cir.· 1986-08-01 ·cited 43×
  An interlocutory order requiring a party to set aside assets to satisfy a potential judgment, even if similar to an attachment, is appealable as a preliminary injunction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) if it is coercive and treated as such by the parties and the court. Furthermore,
• Columbia Nitrogen Corp. v. Royster Co.
  451 F.2d 3· 4th Cir.· 1971-10-26 ·cited 43×
  The court held that evidence of trade usage and course of dealing should have been admitted to explain or supplement the contract terms, entitling Columbia to a new trial on the contract claim, but affirmed the judgment on the antitrust issues.
• TCP Indus., Inc. v. Uniroyal, Inc.
  661 F.2d 542· 6th Cir.· 1981-09-29 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the jury's findings regarding contract modification and the reasonableness of prices under the 1974 contract were supported by sufficient evidence, and that certain procedural errors did not warrant reversal.
• Chatlos Sys., Inc. v. Nat'l Cash Register Corp. (NCR Corporation). Appeal of Chatlos Sys., Inc.
  635 F.2d 1081· 3d Cir.· 1980-11-26 ·cited 42×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 2
  A contractual exclusion of consequential damages is enforceable unless unconscionable, even if a limited remedy fails of its essential purpose, and the measure of damages for breach of warranty should consider market value.
• Bonebrake v. COX
  499 F.2d 951· 8th Cir.· 1974-07-02 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the Uniform Commercial Code was misconstrued regarding notice requirements for breach of warranty and the applicability of the Code to mixed goods and services contracts. The court also found that the buyers' actions constituted anticipatory repudiation by the
• Turk v. ST. Petersburg Bank & Tr. Co.
  281 So. 2d 534· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-07-25 ·cited 42×
  Irving Turk appealed a jury verdict awarding the bank a deficiency judgment for $7,490 following repossession and sale of automobiles pledged as collateral. The court reversed, holding that the bank failed to comply with the Uniform Commercial Code's notice requirement and theref
• de Sanchez v. Banco Central de Nicaragua
  770 F.2d 1385· 5th Cir.· 1985-09-19 ·cited 40×
  The court held that Nicaragua's stop-payment order was a breach of contract, not a "taking of property" under the FSIA, and thus not actionable in U.S. courts.
• K.M.C. Co., Inc. v. Irving Tr. Co.
  757 F.2d 752· 6th Cir.· 1985-03-04 ·cited 40×
  The court held that a jury waiver provision in a contract can be invalidated by prior oral representations that it would not be enforced, and that a lender's refusal to advance funds under a financing agreement, without prior notice, can breach the implied covenant of good faith
• Aaron Ferer & Sons Ltd. v. The Chase Manhattan Bank
  731 F.2d 112· 2d Cir.· 1984-03-14 ·cited 39×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs' claims, holding that the negligence claims were time-barred, no fiduciary duty was established, the release was valid and barred the action, and the money had and received claim failed.
• Evans Transp. Co. v. Scullin Steel Co.
  693 F.2d 715· 7th Cir.· 1982-11-30 ·cited 39×
  A district court's dismissal of a diversity suit due to a parallel state action is improper; the suit should be stayed, and the decision to stay should be based on factors beyond mere timing or judicial economy.
• United States v. The City OF Twin Falls
  806 F.2d 862· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-15 ·cited 38×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 2
  The court held that the district court properly exercised ancillary and pendent jurisdiction over the City's third-party claims and did not err in ruling as a matter of law that Envirotech's pre-bid submittal did not modify the contract, that the contract was for the sale of good
• Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp.
  626 F.2d 280· 3d Cir.· 1980-07-09 ·cited 38×
  Under Illinois law, a purchaser of a product cannot recover damages under tort theories for the failure of the product to perform satisfactorily (economic loss), absent personal injury or damage to other property.
• Clements Auto Co. v. The Serv. Bureau Corp.
  444 F.2d 169· 8th Cir.· 1971-04-27 ·cited 38×
  A contract provision disclaiming warranties does not preclude liability for actionable misrepresentation under Minnesota law, even if the misrepresentations are innocent.
• C. Itoh & Co. (America) Inc. v. The Jordan Int'l Co.
  552 F.2d 1228· 7th Cir.· 1977-04-04 ·cited 37×
  A district court cannot deny a stay pending arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act based on judicial economy or the need to resolve all disputes in a single forum. Furthermore, a contract formed by conduct under UCC § 2-207(3) does not include additional terms like arbitra
• Grant v. Imperial Motors
  539 F.2d 506· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-27 ·cited 37×
  The court held that an acceleration clause is not a default charge requiring disclosure under the Truth in Lending Act, but that failure to itemize official fees requires disclosure as part of the finance charge.
• Consolidated Data Terminals v. Applied Digit. Data Sys., Inc.
  708 F.2d 385· 9th Cir.· 1983-05-10 ·cited 36×
  The court affirmed liability for breach of warranty but modified the damages award, and remanded fraud and tortious interference claims for a new trial due to procedural unfairness.
• LaFERNEY v. Scott Smith Oldsmobile, Inc.
  410 So. 2d 534· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-02-03 ·cited 36×
  The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's reduction of attorney fees awarded under Florida's Deceptive Trade Practices Act (Chapter 501), holding that the trial court abused its discretion by reducing fees by 80% based on the plaintiff's failure to separately al
• Harry H. and Thelma Gibbs v. Titelman
  502 F.2d 1107· 3d Cir.· 1974-08-01 ·cited 36×
  The court held that private self-help repossession of automobiles, even when permitted by state statute, does not constitute state action under the Fourteenth Amendment or 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• United States v. Hext
  444 F.2d 804· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-25 ·cited 36×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that buyers in the ordinary course of business, who purchased cotton from a gin owned by the farmer who granted the FHA a security interest, took the cotton free of that security interest under UCC § 9-307(1). Consequently, intermediaries who facilitated the sale w
• FMC Fin. Corp. v. Murphree
  632 F.2d 413· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-08 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the warranty disclaimer in the lease was conspicuous and valid, but that the issue of whether FMC Finance and FMC Corporation should be treated as a single entity under the piercing the corporate veil doctrine presented a jury question.
• Posttape Assocs. v. Eastman Kodak Co.
  537 F.2d 751· 3d Cir.· 1976-06-17 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the imputation of a principal's knowledge of trade usage to the partnership and in excluding evidence of the plaintiff's insurance coverage, both of which were relevant to establishing an agreement to l
• Dorton v. Collins & Aikman Corp. & Painter Carpet Mills, Inc.
  453 F.2d 1161· 6th Cir.· 1972-01-06 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the arbitration clause in the acknowledgment forms was a proposal for addition to the contract under UCC § 2-207(2) and would be binding only if it did not materially alter the buyer's oral offer, requiring further factual findings.
• Sw. Forest Indus., Inc. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.
  422 F.2d 1013· 9th Cir.· 1970-02-09 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the parties' actions and stipulations effectively converted the proceedings into a trial on the merits, and that the Westinghouse warranty, as a matter of law, limited liability for consequential damages and negligence.
• J.R. Carter v. Cessna Fin. Corp.
  498 So. 2d 1319· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-12-03 ·cited 34×
  Carter appealed a deficiency judgment following the forced sale of a repossessed aircraft, claiming the sale was not commercially reasonable because he was not given notice of the aircraft's location and thus could not inspect it. The court affirmed the summary judgment, finding