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

• C.A. Leasing Serv. Corp. v. Zorn's (Howard) Equip. Serv., Inc.
  565 So. 2d 744· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-07-05 ·cited 4×
  The trial court erred by excluding crucial documentary evidence regarding a corporate merger and by improperly finding personal guaranties unconscionable and inapplicable, thus mandating a new trial.
• Finizio v. Shubow
  557 So. 2d 640· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-02-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the settlement agreement created an enforceable security interest in the securities, even if not fully perfected by possession, and the probate court properly ordered their delivery.
• Lamp Fair, Inc. v. Perez-Ortiz
  888 F.2d 173· 1st Cir.· 1989-10-25 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  A secured creditor cannot both retain collateral for its own use and obtain a deficiency judgment against the debtor under Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
• Uniwest Mortg. Co. v. Dadecor Condos., Inc.
  877 F.2d 431· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the guaranty agreement is governed by common law choice of law principles, and under Texas law, the contractual choice of Colorado law is enforceable because Texas' interest is not materially greater than Colorado's. Furthermore, under Colorado law, the contin
• Mini Mart, Inc. v. Direct Sales Tire Co.
  876 F.2d 63· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-01 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of fraud and strict liability claims but remanded the remaining claims for the district court to provide its reasoning.
• Greater Buffalo Press, Inc. v. Fed. Reserve Bank OF NEW York
  866 F.2d 38· 2d Cir.· 1989-01-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Federal Regulation J, which limits Federal Reserve Banks' liability to 'senders' of checks, precludes the plaintiffs' claim for damages due to delayed check processing, as the plaintiffs were not 'senders'.
• Manchester Pipeline Corp. v. Peoples Natural GAS Co.
  862 F.2d 1439· 10th Cir.· 1988-12-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding of a contract, but reversed the damages award due to an erroneous jury instruction regarding the calculation of future market prices.
• Sec. Fin. Grp., Inc. v. N. Ky. Bank & Tr., Inc.
  858 F.2d 304· 6th Cir.· 1988-09-23 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code (Ucc) Article 5
  Documents presented as letters of credit are enforceable as such under UCC Article 5, regardless of underlying agreements or alleged illegality, because they meet the statutory definition of a credit.
• Davy Venturelli v. Cincinnati
  850 F.2d 825· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding of breach of warranty of merchantability, and that Massachusetts law does not reduce a breach of warranty verdict based on comparative fault.
• Blanchard v. Peoples Bank
  844 F.2d 264· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-10 ·cited 4×
• Eugene v. Klein
  845 F.2d 76· 4th Cir.· 1988-04-25 ·cited 4×
  A contract was formed for the sale of the jet, but specific performance was an inappropriate remedy because the aircraft was not unique and money damages would be adequate.
• Transamerica Ins. Co. v. Barnett Bank OF Marion Cnty., N.A.
  524 So. 2d 439· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-03-24 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  Transamerica Insurance Company (surety) appealed a summary judgment in favor of Barnett Bank of Marion County regarding priority claims to earned but unpaid construction contract payments when a contractor defaults. The Fifth District Court of Appeal held that a financing bank's
• Crocker Nat'l Bank v. Ideco Div. OF Dresser Indus., Inc.
  839 F.2d 1104· 5th Cir.· 1988-03-15 ·cited 4×
  A seller retaining possession of goods maintains a perfected purchase money security interest, and the buyer's 'special property interest' upon identification to the contract is insufficient to allow the buyer to transfer a security interest to a third party.
• United States v. Rotherham
  836 F.2d 359· 7th Cir.· 1988-01-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's security interest was subordinate to the government's tax liens because he failed to perfect his interest before the IRS seized the property, and the income tax lien was properly filed before the security interest attached.
• Airline Reporting Corp. v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Holly Hill
  832 F.2d 823· 4th Cir.· 1987-10-29 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code (Ucc) Article 5
  The issuer of a letter of credit has no available defense on the issue of liability to the beneficiary, as the letter of credit contract is independent of underlying agreements and exceptions like 'fraud in the transaction' were not met.
• R.E. Davis Chem. Corp. v. Diasonics, Inc.
  826 F.2d 678· 7th Cir.· 1987-08-13 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 2
  A lost volume seller can recover lost profits under UCC § 2-708(2), and the 'due credit' language does not preclude this. The tort of intentional interference with contractual relations requires more than knowledge that a breach is substantially certain.
• Sound of Mkt. St., Inc. v. Cont'l Bank Int'l
  819 F.2d 384· 3d Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code (Ucc) Article 5
  An advising bank does not owe a tort or statutory duty of timely transmission to the beneficiary of a letter of credit.
• S.E.L. Maduro (Florida) Inc. v. Strachan Shipping Co.
  800 F.2d 1572· 11th Cir.· 1986-10-08 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  An unperfected security interest has priority over a general unsecured creditor's claim, and a right of setoff cannot abrogate a valid security interest.
• Murdaugh Volkswagen, Inc. v. The First Nat'l Bank OF S.C.
  801 F.2d 719· 4th Cir.· 1986-09-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Mrs. Murdaugh qualified as a bank customer under South Carolina law, and sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings of wrongful dishonor and proximate causation of damages.
• 2000 Watermark Ass'n, Inc. v. The Celotex Corp.
  784 F.2d 1183· 4th Cir.· 1986-02-28 ·cited 4×
  Under South Carolina law, a plaintiff cannot recover in negligence for purely intangible economic loss; such claims are generally relegated to contract or warranty law.
• Bankers Tr. Co. of W. N.Y. v. Crawford
  781 F.2d 39· 3d Cir.· 1986-01-13 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that Kutner Buick was a holder in due course. The court found that Pennsylvania law does not recognize the 'close-connection' doctrine as a basis to defeat holder in due course status and that there is no affirma
• Consumers Power Co. v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. Appeal of Curtiss-Wright Corp.
  780 F.2d 1093· 3d Cir.· 1986-01-13 ·cited 4×
  Under New Jersey law, claims for economic loss, including damage to the defective product itself, are governed by contract law, not tort law, especially in commercial settings.
• Gen. Foods Corp. v. Valley LEA Dairies, Inc.
  771 F.2d 1093· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instructions on the "incurred risk" defense were inadequate because they did not properly distinguish between general risks inherent in a product and specific, undisclosed risks arising from the seller's misconduct, and that the buyer's diligence in t
• Sanco, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.
  771 F.2d 1081· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-29 ·cited 4×
  Indiana law does not permit recovery in tort for purely economic losses arising from a transaction governed by the Uniform Commercial Code, and a manufacturer's express warranty disclaiming implied warranties and limiting remedies is effective.
• Hotel Riviera, Inc. v. First Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. OF Okla. City
  768 F.2d 1201· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-29 ·cited 4×
  A bank cannot assert the personal defense of failure of consideration against an endorsee of a cashier's check who had no knowledge of the fraud that led to the check's issuance.
• Southtrust Bank OF Ala. v. Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp.
  760 F.2d 1240· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the inclusion and exercise of after-acquired property and future advances clauses in BWAC's security agreements converted its purchase money security interest (PMSI) into an ordinary security interest, thus losing its priority status.
• In re Maryville Sav. & Loan Corp. v. McDONALD
  760 F.2d 119· 6th Cir.· 1985-04-29 ·cited 4×
  The bankruptcy trustee is entitled to proceeds from promissory notes when the creditor bank failed to perfect its security interest under the U.C.C.
• Am. Petrofina Mktg., Inc. v. Weiner
  460 So. 2d 527· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-12-12 ·cited 4×
  American Petrofina Marketing, a secured creditor, appealed the trial court's denial of its deficiency judgment claim after selling collateral in a commercially unreasonable manner under Florida's UCC. The court reversed, holding that a commercially unreasonable sale does not auto
• Colonial Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. v. Musgrave
  749 F.2d 1092· 4th Cir.· 1984-12-03 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court affirmed the grant of judgment n.o.v. for the sellers on the purchasers' fraud claims, finding insufficient evidence of material misrepresentation, fraudulent intent, or reasonable reliance. The court vacated and remanded for a jury trial on certain factual issues regar
• Allen M. Campbell Co. v. Va. Metal Indus., Inc.
  708 F.2d 930· 4th Cir.· 1983-06-03 ·cited 4×
  A promise unsupported by consideration can be enforced under the doctrine of promissory estoppel if the promisee reasonably relied on the promise to their detriment, even if the promise is oral and would otherwise be barred by the statute of frauds.
• Davidson v. Lonoke Prod. Credit Ass'n
  695 F.2d 1115· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-22 ·cited 4×
  The prior Arkansas state court judgment collaterally estops the PCA from relitigating its security interest in the crops, as the issue was actually litigated and decided against PCA, and Arkansas law would likely follow modern trends rejecting strict mutuality of estoppel.
• Frank v. James Talcott, Inc.
  692 F.2d 734· 11th Cir.· 1982-11-29 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that Talcott's perfected security interest in the installment sales contracts and their proceeds takes priority over Frank's unperfected security interest, even though Talcott's interest was acquired later.
• In re Tulsa Port Warehouse Co., Inc. v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp. & Chuck Naiman Buick Co.
  690 F.2d 809· 10th Cir.· 1982-10-14 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that the "Non-Maintenance Lease Agreements" were in fact security agreements subject to the requirements of Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, not true leases.
• Rawl's Auto Auction Sales, Inc. v. Dick Herriman Ford, Inc.
  690 F.2d 422· 4th Cir.· 1982-10-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that withholding title certificates prevented ownership transfer to Irvin, and thus to Rawl's, and that Rawl's was not a buyer in ordinary course due to its knowledge of Irvin's financial issues and deviation from its usual practices.
• Vern Lettinga v. Agristor Credit Corp.
  686 F.2d 442· 6th Cir.· 1982-08-26 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that Agristor's possession and sale of cows not subject to its security interest constituted conversion, but Lettinga failed to prove the identity of most cows in which he held a security interest.
• United States v. Newcomb
  682 F.2d 758· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-15 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Article 9, as adopted in Missouri, governs security interests in growing crops, and the description of the real estate in the security agreement was adequate.
• Cont'l Ctr., Inc. v. Walter E. Heller & Co. OF Fla.
  415 So. 2d 751· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-05-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while Continental Center, as a successor in interest, could challenge the commercial reasonableness of the sale of collateral, the Uniform Commercial Code provisions regarding notice and sale of personalty did not apply to the real estate mortgage.
• Brayton Chems., Inc. v. First Farmers State Bank OF Minier
  671 F.2d 1047· 7th Cir.· 1982-03-03 ·cited 4×
  A bank's positive credit report, despite industry custom, cannot support a fraud claim if it was made confidential and stale, and the recipient had no right to rely on it; however, a bank officer's subsequent misrepresentations intended to lull a customer into inaction can suppor
• United Cntys. Tr. Co. v. MAC LUM
  643 F.2d 1140· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-01 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The dissenting judge believes the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for Ollie's, arguing Georgia law should apply and enforce the waiver of defenses.
• SUN First Nat'l Bank OF Orlando v. Miller
  397 So. 2d 943· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-04-08 ·cited 4×
  Sun First National Bank appealed a judgment finding that the Florida Department of Revenue's tax lien on two motor vehicles was superior to the bank's security interest. The court affirmed, holding that because the Department became a lien creditor before the bank perfected its s
• Bernina Distribs., Inc. v. Bernina Sewing Mach. Co., Inc.
  646 F.2d 434· 10th Cir.· 1981-04-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the importer could not add a surcharge for currency exchange rate fluctuations beyond the actual cost increase and that the contract was not impracticable or unconscionable. However, the court reversed the trial court's method of calculating profit on new mode
• Sommers v. Int'l Bus. Machs. & W. Publ'g Co.
  640 F.2d 686· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-25 ·cited 4×
  A copy of a security agreement filed as a financing statement is insufficient if not signed by the debtor, unless the security agreement expressly allows it or the original has been filed.
• USA F/u/B/o Vulcan Materials v. Volpe Constr.
  622 F.2d 880· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a contract can be mutually rescinded by the parties, and such rescission is not dependent on a finding of breach, thus barring claims for damages. However, prejudgment interest and attorney's fees were improperly denied to Vulcan.
• Richwagen v. Lilienthal
  386 So. 2d 247· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-07-02 ·cited 4×
  Richwagen appeals a replevin judgment denying him possession of a boat sold by a marina to Lilienthal. The court reverses, holding that the marina lacked a perfected warehouseman's lien because no warehouse receipt was issued, and therefore could not convey good title to Lilienth
• Fed. Express Corp. v. PAN Am. World Airways, Inc.
  623 F.2d 1297· 8th Cir.· 1980-07-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the term 'initial training' in the aircraft sales contract was ambiguous and, when interpreted in light of trade usage under the UCC, meant training for the initial crew to operate the aircraft; furthermore, the buyer waived this training by obtaining it throu
• Kunststoffwerk Alfred Huber v. R. J. Dick, Inc.
  621 F.2d 560· 3d Cir.· 1980-05-12 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 2
  A seller must prove an agreement limiting damages to avoid liability for consequential damages; a course of dealing was insufficient to establish such an agreement here.
• Cates v. Morgan Portable Bldg. Corp.
  591 F.2d 17· 7th Cir.· 1979-01-10 ·cited 4×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 2
  The court held that the district court's calculation of consequential damages was clearly erroneous due to reliance on improper financial data and an overly certain estimate of future occupancy.
• Fratelli Gardino v. Caribbean Lumber Co., Inc.
  587 F.2d 204· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that damages must be calculated based on the modified contract price, not the original contract price, as contract modifications under the UCC require no consideration and are binding if made in good faith.
• Shanks v. Greenbriar Dodge, Inc.
  577 F.2d 296· 5th Cir.· 1978-07-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the assignment of unearned insurance premiums constitutes a security interest that must be disclosed under the Truth-In-Lending Act and Regulation Z.
• Froning's, Inc. v. Johnston Feed Serv., Inc.
  568 F.2d 108· 8th Cir.· 1978-01-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a dissolved corporation could continue an action in its name and that a buyer was not required to tender payment when it would be futile or contrary to established course of dealing.