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

• Morey Mach. Co., Inc. v. Great W. Indus. Mach. Co.
  507 F.2d 987· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-07 ·cited 6×
  A document can serve as both a financing statement and a security agreement if it creates a security interest and is signed by the debtor. A buyer with actual notice of a prior security interest is not a buyer in the ordinary course of business.
• Guida v. The Exch. Nat'l Bank OF Tampa
  308 So. 2d 148· Fla. 2d DCA· 1975-02-05 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision invalidating the patent for obviousness.
• In re Colacci's OF Am. v. Gifford
  490 F.2d 1118· 10th Cir.· 1974-01-18 ·cited 6×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 2
  The court held that the seller's repossession of equipment was a preferential transfer under the Bankruptcy Act, not a valid cancellation of the sale.
• In re Charley Paul McCLAIN v. Utica Square Nat'l Bank OF Tulsa
  447 F.2d 241· 10th Cir.· 1971-08-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that parol evidence is admissible to determine the primary use of collateral and that a warranty of use in a security agreement is not conclusive for filing purposes.
• Vern Klingbiel v. Commercial Credit Corp., Inc.
  439 F.2d 1303· 10th Cir.· 1971-03-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that repossession of a vehicle without notice or demand, even when the contract allows acceleration if the seller feels insecure, constitutes unlawful conversion if the contract requires demand after acceleration.
• Brodie Hotel Supply, Inc. v. United States
  431 F.2d 1316· 9th Cir.· 1970-09-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that under Alaska's Uniform Commercial Code, a purchase-money security interest is perfected within the ten-day grace period if filed within ten days of the debtor becoming obligated, not merely upon taking possession.
• Clark Equip. Co. v. Armstrong Equip. Co.
  431 F.2d 54· 5th Cir.· 1970-09-01 ·cited 6×
  Federal courts have jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief to enforce state-created substantive rights, even if a specific state remedy like detinue might not be available or adequate.
• Framingham Tr. Co. v. Gould-National Batteries, Inc.
  427 F.2d 856· 1st Cir.· 1970-06-08 ·cited 6×
  A performing surety's right of subrogation to unpaid contract balances for labor and material costs prevails over a bank's perfected security interest.
• Swift & Co. v. Jamestown Nat'l Bank
  426 F.2d 1099· 8th Cir.· 1970-05-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Bank's security interest was not perfected against Swift, a buyer in the ordinary course of business, because the Bank failed to file in the proper place and authorized the sale of the collateral. The Bank wrongfully converted Swift's cattle.
• Thomas C. Bogus in the Matter of Jacob Rosenblum v. The Am. Nat'l Bank OF Cheyenne
  401 F.2d 458· 10th Cir.· 1968-10-09 ·cited 6×
  A Wyoming liquor license constitutes 'property' under the Uniform Commercial Code, allowing for a valid security interest to be perfected in it.
• Fargo Nat'l Bank v. Massey-Ferguson, Inc.
  400 F.2d 223· 8th Cir.· 1968-08-29 ·cited 6×
  A bank is liable for proceeds of checks cashed on unauthorized endorsements unless the payee is precluded from setting up the forgery or want of authority, which requires the payee's conduct to proximately cause the bank's loss.
• Tropicana Pools, Inc. v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Titusville
  206 So. 2d 48· Fla. 4th DCA· 1968-01-22 ·cited 6×
  This case concerns whether a bank can refuse to honor a cashier's check it issued due to a lack of consideration when the payee is not a holder in due course. The court held that the bank could refuse payment because the payee, not having given value for the check, was not a hold
• Ben Zuke in Bankr. of Midas Coin Co., Inc. v. ST. Johns Cmty. Bank
  387 F.2d 118· 8th Cir.· 1968-01-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that filing a financing statement was not required to perfect the bank's security interest in numismatic coins pledged as collateral, as possession perfected the lien under UCC § 400.9-305.
• Foster v. Colo. Radio Corp.
  381 F.2d 222· 10th Cir.· 1967-07-06 ·cited 6×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 2
  The court held that a party cannot claim nonperformance of a condition as a defense if their own inaction caused the nonperformance, and that the Uniform Commercial Code applies to the sale of goods even if part of a larger transaction.
• In re United Thrift Stores, Inc. v. United Thrift Stores, Inc.
  363 F.2d 11· 3d Cir.· 1966-07-06 ·cited 6×
• Charles David Maley in Bankr. of Nat'l Lumber Co. v. E. Side Bank OF Chicago
  361 F.2d 393· 7th Cir.· 1966-06-01 ·cited 6×
  A bank is liable for gross negligence when it processes checks payable to a corporation for the personal benefit of a corporate officer, especially when it has actual knowledge of the officer's lack of authority and the transactions violate corporate resolutions.
• Erick A. Palma, M.D. v. S. Fla. Pulmonary & Critical Care, LLC
  307 So. 3d 860· Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-09-16 ·cited 5×
  Physicians who signed promissory notes for their medical practice's line of credit were found to be accommodation indorsers, not directly liable to the practice for the outstanding debt. The court held that the practice, as the accommodated party, could not seek contribution or u
• HSBC Bank USA v. Buset
  241 So. 3d 882· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-02-07 ·cited 5×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  A trial court's order granting an involuntary dismissal following a nonjury trial is a final, appealable order when it contains language entering judgment, and the trial court's reservation of jurisdiction to award attorney's fees or impose sanctions does not affect the finality
• Sabido v. The Bank OF NEW York Mellon
  241 So. 3d 865· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-12-20 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the bank failed to comply with the lost note statute by not proving entitlement to enforce the instrument when it was lost, thus reversing the foreclosure judgment.
• Dep't OF Transp. v. United Cap. Funding Corp.
  219 So. 3d 126· Fla. 2d DCA· 2017-04-28 ·cited 5×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The Florida Department of Transportation appealed a summary judgment requiring it to pay United Capital Funding Corp., the assignee of accounts receivable originally owed to vendor Arbor One, despite the DOT's continued payment to Arbor One after notice of assignment. The court h
• Cheese & Grill Rest., Inc. v. Wachovia Bank, N.A.
  970 So. 2d 372· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-10-24 ·cited 5×
  A restaurant sued two banks for losses caused by its bookkeeper's embezzlement scheme involving forged checks. The court affirmed summary judgment against the restaurant, holding that the restaurant failed to timely detect and report the fraudulent transactions as required by the
• Crown Gen. Stores, Inc. v. Ultra Meat Mkt., Inc.
  843 So. 2d 287· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-02-19 ·cited 5×·via Ucc-1 Financing Statement
  Crown General Stores appeals a judgment in favor of Ultra Meat Market regarding non-payment of a leasehold mortgage obligation. The court reversed, holding that Ultra was not a bona fide purchaser without notice because it had implied actual notice of Crown's pre-existing interes
• Mirage Resorts v. Quiet Nacelle Corp.
  206 F.3d 1398· 11th Cir.· 2000-03-24 ·cited 5×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  Mirage Resorts obtained a judgment against Quiet Nacelle Corporation and garnished bank accounts before Quiet Technology, a senior secured creditor, could declare the debtor in default and foreclose its security interest. The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court lacked s
• Bradley Factor, Inc. v. United States
  86 F. Supp. 2d 1140· M.D. Fla.· 2000-02-08 ·cited 5×·via Ucc-1 Financing Statement
  The court held that the economic loss rule does not bar the plaintiff's fraud in the inducement claim because it is an independent tort, and that the defendant breached its warranty as a matter of law.
• 4100 5th Ave. Corp. v. PHL/Millwork Div., Inc.
  722 So. 2d 218· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-10-21 ·cited 5×·via Ucc-1 Financing Statement
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting judgment on the pleadings because there were remaining issues of fact regarding the proper filing of a financing statement and Redstone's knowledge thereof.
• Dresser Indus., Inc. v. The Gradall Co.
  965 F.2d 1442· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-09 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the jury's damage award was rationally connected to the evidence and that Wisconsin law permits terms implied from course of performance, dealing, and usage of trade to supplement a contract formed under UCC § 2-207(3).
• Fed. Ins. Co. v. NCNB Nat'l Bank OF N.C.
  958 F.2d 1544· 11th Cir.· 1992-04-24 ·cited 5×
  An insurance company that paid an employer's losses from employee embezzlement sued two banks as subrogee and assignee of the employer. The employee obtained payment of corporate checks lacking required signatures by obtaining oral authorization from a bank clerk, then embezzled
• Airport Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Prevost Car, Inc.
  788 F. Supp. 1203· S.D. Fla.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a motion to strike an amended complaint filed during a pending motion to dismiss is permissible, but the amended complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim under the economic loss rule and lack of privity for the warranty claim.
• Palm Beach Atl. Coll., Inc. v. First United Fund, Ltd.
  928 F.2d 1538· 11th Cir.· 1991-04-22 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the College's cross-appeal was dismissed as untimely, and affirmed the district court's awards of compensatory damages for breach of contract and punitive damages for fraud, but reversed the award of trebled damages for civil theft due to an erroneous jury ins
• Golden Door Jewelry Creations, Inc. v. Lloyds Underwriters
  758 F. Supp. 708· S.D. Fla.· 1991-02-21 ·cited 5×
  The court held that consignors have direct rights of recovery under a jeweler's block policy, and their claims are not barred by the insured's alleged fraudulent acts, as the policy's liability provisions override exclusions.
• Ballas v. Spolyar
  548 So. 2d 1168· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-09-08 ·cited 5×
• Carlson v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  883 F.2d 287· 4th Cir.· 1989-08-22 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing claims based on unconscionable warranty limitations solely on the pleadings, but correctly dismissed claims for lost resale value under the implied warranty of merchantability.
• Andy Marine, Inc. v. Zidell, Inc.
  812 F.2d 534· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-11 ·cited 5×
  The court held that compliance with the underlying charter agreement was not a condition of the letter of credit, and the sums in the invoice were due under the letter of credit, thus the district court erred in enjoining payment.
• In re Allstar Bldg. Prods., Inc. v. Allstar Bldg. Prods., Inc.
  809 F.2d 1534· 11th Cir.· 1987-02-17 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a creditor's security interest in a bankrupt's personal property was invalid because it was not authorized by the corporation's board of directors as required by Alabama law.
• Lawrence v. Cent. Plaza Bank & Tr. Co.
  469 So. 2d 201· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-05-22 ·cited 5×
  Lawrence purchased a cashier's check from County Bank payable to William Morris Agency and gave it to Grogan, who deposited it in an attorney's trust account at Central Plaza Bank using a forged endorsement. The court held that the purchaser of a cashier's check, unlike the drawe
• Williams v. W. Pac. Fin. Corp.
  643 F.2d 331· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-23 ·cited 5×
  A lender does not violate the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) by failing to disclose a 10-day limitation on security interests in after-acquired consumer goods if the security deed does not create such an interest under state law, and the disclosure statement is not misleading.
• Fla. Boca Raton Hous. Ass'n, Inc. v. Malone
  325 So. 2d 22· Fla. 4th DCA· 1976-01-16 ·cited 5×
  The court held that there was no legal basis to order the reissue of a stock certificate that was outside the court's jurisdiction, even if wrongfully removed.
• Tula Rincon v. Bank OF Am., N.A.
  206 So. 3d 793· Fla. 3d DCA· 2016-11-09 ·cited 4×
  Tula Rincon appeals the denial of her motion to vacate a foreclosure judgment against her, arguing that U.S. Bank lacked standing because the mortgage assignment was allegedly forged or invalid due to a merger. The court affirmed, holding that lack of standing must be raised as a
• Lefkowitz v. Quality Labor Mgmt., LLC
  159 So. 3d 147· Fla. 5th DCA· 2014-11-14 ·cited 4×·via Ucc-1 Financing Statement
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a post-judgment motion to intervene, as the ends of justice required allowing the intervenor to defend his interest in collateral.
• Polymers, Inc. v. Ultra Flo Filtration Sys., Inc.
  33 F. Supp. 2d 1008· M.D. Fla.· 1998-12-14 ·cited 4×·via Florida Uniform Commercial Code
  The court held that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant because the plaintiff's declaratory judgment action did not arise from the defendant's limited business activities in Florida, and the defendant's contacts were insufficient to satisfy due process.
• Robie v. Port Douglas (Florida), Inc.
  662 So. 2d 1389· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-11-29 ·cited 4×·via Ucc-1 Filing
  A landlord's statutory lien on a tenant's equipment is not superior to a prior perfected chattel mortgage if the original lease is terminated and a new lease is entered into before any default, as the lien's superiority does not extend beyond the original lease term.
• Ins. Co. OF the State OF Pa. v. Genova Express Lines, Inc.
  605 So. 2d 941· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-09-29 ·cited 4×
  A carrier sought to escape liability for theft of goods by claiming the shipper's loss of the bill of lading defeated any claim against it. The court held that a carrier's liability for failure to deliver goods is not defeated by the shipper's inability to produce the bill of lad
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Payne
  973 F.2d 403· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the D'Oench, Duhme doctrine bars Payne's fraudulent inducement defense, but the federal holder in due course doctrine does not apply to non-negotiable guaranties, allowing Payne to assert defenses regarding notice of collateral sale and commercial reasonablene
• Merk v. Jewel Food Stores Div. OF Jewel Cos.
  945 F.2d 889· 7th Cir.· 1991-09-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that national labor policy does not mandate that collective bargaining agreements be more formal than other contracts, and oral agreements can be enforced even if not submitted to membership ratification.
• Bank OF China v. David C.W. Chan
  937 F.2d 780· 2d Cir.· 1991-06-27 ·cited 4×
  A guarantor cannot waive the defense of commercial unreasonableness under New York's Uniform Commercial Code Article 9, but such unreasonableness only affects the amount of damages recoverable, not the guarantor's underlying liability.
• Migerobe, Inc. v. Certina USA, Inc.
  924 F.2d 1330· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings of breach of contract, actual or apparent authority of the salesman, and the award of consequential damages for lost corollary sales.
• Miles v. Kohli & Kaliher Assocs., Ltd.
  917 F.2d 235· 6th Cir.· 1990-10-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that summary judgment for USS and American Culvert on strict liability claims based on inadequate warning was improper due to a change in Ohio law, and that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding negligence claims for failure to warn or instruct.
• Stanley G. Makoroff for Guterl Special Steel Corp. v. The City OF Lockport
  916 F.2d 890· 3d Cir.· 1990-10-19 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the court should defer to the Second Circuit's interpretation of New York tax law regarding the perfection of tax interests in bankruptcy.
• Gray & Co. v. Firstenberg Mach. Co., Inc.
  913 F.2d 758· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants because their contacts with the forum state were insufficient to establish purposeful availment or reasonable exercise of jurisdiction.
• In re T.H. Richards Processing Co. v. Bank OF Cal.
  910 F.2d 639· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-08 ·cited 4×·via Ucc-1 Financing Statement
  The court held that agreeing to a deferred payment plan does not automatically release a producer's lien under California law, and that marshaling of liens was inapplicable because both parties had interests in both sets of inventory.