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

• CA, Inc. v. C.A. No. 4300-VCS Ingres Corp.
  Del. Ch.· 2009-12-07
  The court held that Ingres would have been obligated to provide OpenROAD 2006 to CA's legacy customers under the original Divestiture Agreements. However, the subsequent 2007 Reseller Agreement superseded those provisions regarding the terms for obtaining new versions of products
• Charlotte Dev. P'rs, LLC v. Tricom Pictures & Prods., Inc.
  33 So. 3d 690· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-12-02 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that Charlotte Development Partners, LLC waived its right to a jury trial and that its security interest in the cash bond was unperfected, making GE Capital's judgment lien superior.
• Gulf Power Co. v. Coalsales II, L.L.C.
  661 F. Supp. 2d 1270· N.D. Fla.· 2009-09-30
  The court held that the contract was not a sole source agreement, and therefore, the closure of one mine did not excuse the defendant's obligation to supply coal from other approved sources.
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. Henry A. Stenta v. [Unknown]
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2009-05-29
  The court granted the defendants' motion for leave to file an amended answer with affirmative defenses, finding that to deny it would constitute manifest injustice. The court also granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, holding that all of the plaintiff's claims were
• Burley v. Gelco Corp.
  976 So. 2d 97· Fla. 5th DCA· 2008-02-29 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  Gelco Corporation sought a deficiency judgment against John Burley after repossessing and selling three vehicles under a commercial lease agreement. The appellate court reversed summary judgment, holding that Gelco's failure to provide adequate notice of the sale raised a presump
• DE Lage Landen Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Cricket's Termite Control Inc.
  942 So. 2d 1001· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-12-01
  De Lage Landen Financial Services appealed a trial court judgment refusing to enforce a computer lease with Cricket's Termite Control, where the trial court found the lease illegal because Cricket's used the leased automated telephone system in violation of Florida's no-sales-sol
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. Jerry Pisano v. C.A. No. 05C-03-132-FSS Del. Solid Waste Auth.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2006-11-30
  The Delaware Superior Court properly granted summary judgment for the defendant, Delaware Solid Waste Authority (DSWA), in a breach of contract case. The court found that the plaintiff, Pisano, was not a party to the contract between DSWA and PSA, that the agent, Wong, did not ha
• Ayman Boutros, M.D. v. Oscar MIÑOSO, M.D.
  944 So. 2d 1076· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-11-01 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  Dr. Boutros and Dr. Miñoso were equal owners of a medical practice that ceased operations in 2001. Dr. Boutros paid the Wachovia loan and lease termination penalties, then sued Dr. Miñoso for equitable contribution, unjust enrichment, and equitable subrogation. The trial court er
• United Food Mart, Inc. v. Motiva Enters., LLC
  457 F. Supp. 2d 1329· S.D. Fla.· 2005-09-29
  The court held that Motiva was entitled to summary judgment on the breach of contract claim because its fuel pricing was presumed to be in good faith, and on the FMFMPA claim because it was barred by the statute of limitations.
• State v. Moore
  892 So. 2d 1218· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-02-15
  A person cannot be convicted of fraud involving a security interest under section 817.562(2) when the secured party is a protected purchaser under the UCC, because the protected purchaser's right to the pledged stock is inalienable and cannot be disposed of or withheld by the deb
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. Adirondack Grp., Inc. v. Braxton
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2004-05-19
  The appellate court affirmed the lower court's judgment, holding that the defendant's failure to deliver and install a custom fence within the contractually agreed-upon four to six week period constituted a material breach. This breach excused the plaintiff's subsequent cancellat
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. Ruth M. Smith & Norris L. Smith v. CA No. 94C-12-002-JEB Daimlerchrysler Corp.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2002-11-20
  The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motions for summary judgment. The court found that Delaware law applied to the case. Strict liability claims were dismissed as preempted by the UCC. Claims for defective design or manufacture, failure to warn, and consu
• Birwelco-Montenay, Inc. v. Infilco Degremont, Inc.
  827 So. 2d 255· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-10-16
  Birwelco-Montenay and related parties appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Infilco Degremont on a contract dispute regarding a water treatment system. The court reversed, holding that genuine factual disputes existed regarding whether the contract was for goods or serv
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Gladys Dalton
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2002-02-28
  The court granted Ford's motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiffs' claims were barred by the statute of limitations and that they failed to adequately plead damages. The court held that negligence claims were time-barred as the alleged defect was not inherently unknowable a
• Ocean Bank v. Save Imp. & Exp., Inc.
  797 So. 2d 609· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-09-26
  Ocean Bank appealed the denial of its motion to vacate a forfeiture judgment, arguing it was never served with the forfeiture complaint despite holding a perfected security interest in forfeited property. The court held that the state was statutorily required to serve Ocean Bank
• Bell Sports, Inc.
  Del.· 2000-09-07
  The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court's judgment, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the expert testimony of the plaintiff's witnesses, nor in submitting the issues of breach of warranty to the jury. The court also found that t
• Fam. Boating & Marine Ctrs. OF Fla., Inc. v. Bell
  779 So. 2d 402· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-08-11
  Florida appellate court reversed judgment for breach of contract and warranty claims because the purchase contract contained valid disclaimers of express and implied warranties under section 672.316(2).
• JIM MacOn Bldg. Contractors, Inc. v. Lake Cnty.
  763 So. 2d 1223· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-06-02 ·via Uniform Commercial Code (Ucc) Article 5
  The court held that lot owners in a subdivision cannot sue a bank as intended third-party beneficiaries for the bank's alleged breach of irrevocable letters of credit issued to secure infrastructure construction. The decision establishes that letters of credit, by their nature as
• Brandt v. Dugent Liquidating Tr.
  749 So. 2d 1276· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-02-23
  A secured creditor who has received express consent in a security agreement to enter the debtor's premises for repossession and who enters without breach of the peace may lawfully repossess collateral upon default, notwithstanding a subsequent assignment for benefit of creditors
• Allapattah Servs., Inc. v. Exxon Corp.
  967 F. Supp. 2d 982· S.D. Fla.· 1999-08-10
  The court held that the fraudulent concealment doctrine can be adjudicated on a class-wide basis, despite variations in state law regarding reliance and burdens of proof, and that the continuing breach doctrine does not apply to toll the statute of limitations in this case.
• Hughes v. Amerada Hess Corp.
  965 F. Supp. 2d 402· M.D. Fla.· 1999-06-28 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
• Kalman v. World Omni Fin. Corp. & Courtesy Ins. Co.
  732 So. 2d 399· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-04-07 ·via Florida Uniform Commercial Code
  The Kalmans appealed a judgment dismissing their breach of bond claim against World Omni and its surety Courtesy Insurance. The court affirmed, holding that the prejudgment replevin bond was void because the writ itself had been dissolved and the vehicle was never actually taken
• Davis v. McDonald's Corp.
  44 F. Supp. 2d 1251· N.D. Fla.· 1998-03-30
  Summary judgment is granted in part for McDonald's, finding that the franchise agreements expressly disclaimed any protected territory and that the alleged pre-formation misrepresentations were not reasonably relied upon.
• Kirkland v. Miller
  702 So. 2d 620· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-12-17 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that the transaction, structured as an Illinois land trust, was in fact a mortgage securing indebtedness under Florida law, requiring foreclosure rather than ejectment.
• Barb's Sprinklers, Inc. v. Water BOY Lawn Sprinkler's, Inc.
  686 So. 2d 646· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-11-27 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that a secured party who repossesses collateral and fails to sell it effectively retains it in satisfaction of the debt, barring a deficiency judgment.
• Am. President Lines, Ltd. v. Lykes Bros. S.S.
  216 B.R. 856· M.D. Fla.· 1996-09-26
  The court held that the debtor's failure to properly perfect its security interests in charter hire payments under Louisiana and Florida law rendered those interests unperfected and subordinate to the debtor-in-possession's strong-arm powers under § 544(a). Furthermore, the court
• Sunniland Bank v. Greene
  654 So. 2d 990· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-05-03
  The court held that a jury's finding of breach of contract against a party does not preclude a separate cross-claim against that party for alleged violations of the Uniform Commercial Code.
• Barnett Bank of S. Fla., N.A. v. Weitzner (In Re Kavolchyck)
  164 B.R. 1018· S.D. Fla.· 1994-02-25
  A security interest in a leasehold estate and rents derived therefrom is excluded from the Uniform Commercial Code and must be perfected by recording in local county offices, not by filing a UCC-1 financing statement.
• United States v. Stoecklin
  848 F. Supp. 1521· M.D. Fla.· 1994-02-15
  The court granted the IRS's petition to enforce a summons, finding that the IRS had met its burden to establish a prima facie case and that the respondent's numerous arguments against enforcement were frivolous.
• Cont'l Bank N.A. v. Modansky
  997 F.2d 309· 7th Cir.· 1993-06-23
  The court held that the bank did not breach its duty of good faith and fair dealing and that the loan amendments did not discharge the guarantors' obligations.
• In re Newman v. W. Loop Sav. Ass'n
  993 F.2d 90· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-14 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that an annuity contract is a general intangible, not an instrument, requiring a filed financing statement for perfection of a security interest.
• Octagon GAS Sys., Inc. v. Rimmer
  995 F.2d 948· 10th Cir.· 1993-05-27 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that the 'interest' in dispute was not part of the bankruptcy estate because it was conveyed by a prior sales agreement and the parties' intent and course of dealing indicated it was not a security interest under Article 9 of the U.C.C.
• R.S. Martin, Jr. v. Amercable Corp.
  990 F.2d 439· 8th Cir.· 1993-04-12 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that a secured creditor is entitled to payment for past-due amounts owed to a supplier, but not for new materials purchased on the credit of a third party.
• KIT CAR World, Inc. v. Skolnick
  616 So. 2d 1051· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-04-02 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  Kit Car World and related entities secured a promissory note from a debtor with a security interest in assets and after-acquired property related to replica car kit manufacturing. When the debtor defaulted, the secured creditors executed a writ of replevin seizing inventory. Seve
• Atl. Track & Turnout Co. v. Perini Corp.
  989 F.2d 541· 1st Cir.· 1993-03-29
  A seller's good faith reduction in output, even if disproportionate to an estimate, does not violate UCC § 2-306, and a buyer must prove the seller did not act in good faith.
• In re Davis v. Davis
  989 F.2d 208· 6th Cir.· 1993-03-24 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  A requirement for hazard insurance or inclusion of boilerplate language regarding rents, profits, and fixtures in a deed of trust does not constitute additional security that removes a claim from the protection of Bankruptcy Code § 1322(b)(2).
• Koch Hydrocarbon Co. v. MDU Res. Grp., Inc.
  988 F.2d 1529· 8th Cir.· 1993-03-15
  The court held that the McKenzie contract's price term upon deregulation was ambiguous and remanded for consideration of parol evidence, but affirmed the market price determination for damages. The court also affirmed damages based on the capacity of the Phillips plant and affirm
• Stoumbos v. Whitesides
  988 F.2d 949· 9th Cir.· 1993-03-09 ·via Ucc-1 Financing Statement
  The court held that Kilimnik's security interest was limited to assets owned on May 1, 1982, except for after-acquired inventory securing working capital advances, and that his transfer of vehicles and withdrawal from the LAMA were improper.
• In re LOU Levy & Sons Fashions, Inc. v. Michelina J. Romano
  988 F.2d 311· 2d Cir.· 1993-03-05
  A bank's commercially unreasonable conduct in accepting checks with forged endorsements bars it from asserting the drawer's negligence as a defense under UCC § 3-404.
• Horton Dairy, Inc. v. United States
  986 F.2d 286· 8th Cir.· 1993-02-25 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that Horton Dairy, Inc. was the alter ego of its shareholders, Jack and Arlene Horton, and that the IRS had a valid, superior lien on HDI's property to satisfy the Hortons' tax liabilities. However, the court vacated the district court's order awarding a percentage
• Pentech Int'l, Inc. v. Wall St. Clearing Co.
  983 F.2d 441· 2d Cir.· 1993-01-13
  A security interest in a warrant is subject to pre-existing contractual claims to portions of that warrant, even if the security interest is perfected, if the secured party had notice of those claims. A party's admission in deposition regarding contractual obligations can satisfy
• In re H.J. Scheirich Co. v. Kitchen & Bath Distribs., Inc.
  982 F.2d 945· 6th Cir.· 1993-01-05
  The court held that the bankruptcy court committed clear error in finding that Kitchen & Bath provided no documentary support for its claims regarding undelivered July orders and in holding that the seller was legally entitled to withhold delivery due to a past due balance on acc
• First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF S.C. v. Chrysler Credit Corp.
  981 F.2d 127· 4th Cir.· 1992-11-30
  First Federal, though not a holder in due course, can recover as a holder because CCC failed to establish a defense to payment of the dishonored checks.
• Nat'l State Bank v. Fed. Reserve Bank OF NEW York
  979 F.2d 1579· 3d Cir.· 1992-11-24
  The court held that the plaintiff did not meet its initial burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of fact on summary judgment regarding the defendant's alleged breach of ordinary care and timely notification.
• Adkinson v. Int'l Harvester Co.
  975 F.2d 208· 5th Cir.· 1992-10-19
  The court held that Mississippi's commercial code is supplemented by principles of contribution and indemnity, which bar Navistar's claim for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability because Navistar was found to be actively at fault.
• J.V. Shields v. Equine Cap. Corp.
  607 So. 2d 468· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-10-09 ·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  Shields sought declaratory relief to establish his right to a stallion service certificate held by Equine Capital Corporation (ECC), which was necessary to register a thoroughbred foal. The trial court granted summary judgment for ECC based on its claimed security interest in the
• United States ex rel. Bartec Indus., Inc. v. United Pac. Co.
  976 F.2d 1274· 9th Cir.· 1992-10-06
  The court held that a contract for fabricated steel is a sale of goods under the UCC, and damages should be calculated using the cost of 'cover' for lost items. It also held that the surety was not entitled to a set-off for defective materials due to lack of privity.
• HCI Chems. (USA), Inc. v. Henkel KGaA
  966 F.2d 1018· 5th Cir.· 1992-07-27
  The court held that while HCI did not effectively reject the nonconforming goods, it is entitled to damages under an acceptance theory for breach of warranty.
• Centrifugal Casting Mach. Co., Inc. v. Am. Bank & Tr. Co.
  966 F.2d 1348· 10th Cir.· 1992-06-11 ·via Uniform Commercial Code (Ucc) Article 5
  The court held that Iraq did not possess a legally cognizable property interest in the down payment made under the letter of credit, as such interest would contradict the independent nature of letters of credit.
• Porcelli v. United States
  964 F.2d 1306· 2d Cir.· 1992-05-27
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding that the intervening case law did not alter the basis for the original convictions.