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

• Appley v. West
  832 F.2d 1021· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-02 ·cited 26×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted on damages because a material fact issue remains regarding the extent of Ms. Appley's injury, and summary judgment was improper on the RICO claim due to a material fact issue regarding the existence of the necessary 'ent
• The Emery-Waterhouse Co. v. R.I. Hosp. Tr. Nat'l Bank
  757 F.2d 399· 1st Cir.· 1985-03-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the bank's actions in drawing on a letter of credit without a proper demand and despite knowledge of incorrectness constituted fraud, allowing the customer to recover funds and receive punitive damages.
• W. Indus., Inc. v. Newcor Canada Ltd.
  739 F.2d 1198· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-11 ·cited 26×
  The court's majority opinion, which this concurrence agrees with in principle, suggests that trade custom evidence should have been admitted to determine if a limitation of remedy was effective. The concurrence elaborates on how trade custom should be considered in supplementing
• The Lackawanna Leather Co. v. Martin & Stewart, Ltd.
  730 F.2d 1197· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-30 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court's jury instructions were adequate, affirming the judgment.
• K & M Joint Venture v. Smith Int'l, Inc.
  669 F.2d 1106· 6th Cir.· 1982-02-03 ·cited 26×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 2
  The appellate court should defer to the district court's findings on notice if the correct legal standard was applied and the finding is supported by substantial evidence, even if the appellate court would have reached a different conclusion.
• Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. CX Processing Labs., Inc.
  523 F.2d 668· 9th Cir.· 1975-08-28 ·cited 26×
  The court held that CX failed to present sufficient evidence for its antitrust claims and that the trial court did not err in admitting parol evidence or in its jury instructions and rulings on freight charges and interest.
• Aldon Indus., Inc. v. DON Myers & Assocs., Inc.
  517 F.2d 188· 5th Cir.· 1975-08-07 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a seller can recover the price of accepted goods based on a computer printout of accounts receivable if delivery is proven. However, a buyer cannot recover consequential damages for lost prospective profits based on speculative evidence of causation and amount
• Correria v. The Orlando Bank & Tr. Co. & William C. Hooker, Jr.
  235 So. 2d 20· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-05-06 ·cited 26×
  A purchaser of a used automobile from a dealer acquired clear title free of a bank's security lien, despite the bank holding the certificate of title. The court held that under the Uniform Commercial Code, a buyer in the ordinary course of business from a merchant dealer takes fr
• Percival Constr. Co. v. Miller & Miller Auctioneers, Inc.
  532 F.2d 166· 10th Cir.· 1976-03-26 ·cited 25×
  The court held that a lease agreement with an option to purchase for nominal consideration constitutes a security interest under the UCC, and that proceeds from an auction sale are not 'accounts receivable' for a secured creditor when an agency relationship exists. The court also
• McCORKLE v. The First Pa. Banking & Tr. Co.
  459 F.2d 243· 4th Cir.· 1972-04-20 ·cited 25×
  A federal court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over a dispute involving a non-preferred ship mortgage, even if federal law is implicated as a defense, and must dismiss the case.
• Accurate Metal Finishing Corp. v. Carmel
  254 So. 2d 556· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-11-02 ·cited 25×
  Appellants who endorsed promissory notes appealed summary judgment entered against them for principal, interest, and attorney's fees. The court affirmed, holding that affirmative defenses must be pleaded in the complaint and cannot be introduced solely through affidavits in oppos
• Associated Hardware Supply Co. v. The BIG Wheel Distrib. Co.
  355 F.2d 114· 3d Cir.· 1965-12-27 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the fraud claim and counterclaims, and that the parol evidence rule, as supplemented by UCC principles of fraud and misrepresentation, allows evidence of prior oral agreements.
• Troupe v. Redner
  652 So. 2d 394· Fla. 2d DCA· 1995-02-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a party who assigns a note as collateral, and whose assignee then assigns it to another party, no longer possesses the legal title or status as 'holder' necessary to enforce the note.
• Martin v. The Joseph Harris Co., Inc.
  767 F.2d 296· 6th Cir.· 1985-07-15 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a disclaimer of warranty and limitation of remedy clause was unconscionable under Michigan law, and that the implied warranty of merchantability was breached as a matter of law.
• Am. Standard Credit, Inc. v. Nat'l Cement Co.
  643 F.2d 248· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that one of the district court's key factual findings was clearly erroneous, requiring reversal of its judgment, but remanded for further proceedings due to lack of findings on other crucial issues.
• TWO Rivers Co. v. Curtiss Breeding Serv.
  624 F.2d 1242· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-25 ·cited 24×
  The court should allow products liability recovery for damages resulting from defective semen that caused stillborn calves and loss of value in other calves.
• Sec. Nat'l Bank v. Belleville Livestock Comm'n Co., Inc.
  619 F.2d 840· 10th Cir.· 1979-05-04 ·cited 24×
  The court held that summary judgment for the Bank was improper because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding express consent to the sales and whether the converted cattle were covered by the Bank's security interest. The court also noted that the classification of col
• Basham v. Fin. Am. Corp.
  583 F.2d 918· 7th Cir.· 1978-08-16 ·cited 24×
  Creditors are liable for failing to disclose state law limitations on after-acquired property security interests, but good faith reliance on Regulation Z shields them from liability for failing to disclose loan proceeds. TILA claims filed after the one-year statute of limitations
• Anthony v. Cmty. Loan & Inv. Corp.
  559 F.2d 1363· 5th Cir.· 1977-10-03 ·cited 24×
  A reference to a security interest in personal property and to rights and remedies under the Uniform Commercial Code is sufficient to apprise a borrower of the type of security interest created. General descriptions of collateral, such as household goods, are also sufficient unde
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Bank OF Boulder
  911 F.2d 1466· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-20 ·cited 23×·via Uniform Commercial Code (Ucc) Article 5
• Del's BIG Saver Foods, Inc. v. Carpenter Cook, Inc.
  795 F.2d 1344· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-15 ·cited 23×
  A private party's execution of a state court's ex parte order authorizing property repossession constitutes state action for purposes of a § 1983 claim, and Wisconsin's replevin statute, which allows for ex parte orders secured by a bond and provides for a prompt post-deprivation
• United States v. Tucker
  773 F.2d 136· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-06 ·cited 23×
  The court held that a letter of credit is within the scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1014, and that the evidence was sufficient to convict all defendants, with no reversible error found in the trial proceedings.
• United States v. Meadors
  753 F.2d 590· 7th Cir.· 1985-01-24 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the appellant's signature on the guaranty lacked consideration because it was not bargained for, requested, or relied upon by the SBA, and therefore the guaranty is not enforceable on that basis. However, the court reversed and remanded on the issue of interes
• R.W. Murray Co. v. Shatterproof Glass Corp.
  697 F.2d 818· 8th Cir.· 1983-01-11 ·cited 23×
  The court held that express warranties with explicit time periods extending to future performance accrue when the breach is discovered or should have been discovered, not at delivery, and that negligence claims for economic loss are generally barred when an adequate warranty reme
• Eglin Fed. Credit Union v. Curfman
  386 So. 2d 860· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-08-14 ·cited 23×
  Eglin Federal Credit Union wrongfully repossessed and sold Curfman's automobile without his knowledge and despite the fact that he was not in default on his payments. The court affirmed a jury verdict awarding punitive damages, holding that liability for conversion can support pu
• In re Hammons v. Fedders Fin. Corp.
  614 F.2d 399· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-24 ·cited 23×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that Fedders' security interest was unperfected because it failed to file in the correct county at the time of perfection, and Borg-Warner's filing, despite minor errors, was sufficient.
• Westerman v. Sears
  577 F.2d 873· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-01 ·cited 23×
  The court held that while Texas law applied to the strict liability claim and Florida law to the breach of warranty claim, damages could be awarded under both, but not duplicated. A plaintiff cannot appeal a remittitur order they have accepted.
• U. S. Fibres, Inc. v. Proctor & Schwartz, Inc.
  509 F.2d 1043· 6th Cir.· 1975-01-17 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the seller did not breach express or implied warranties, commit fraud, or act negligently, and that the buyer's own actions caused the product defects.
• Wells Fargo Bank v. Bohatka
  112 So. 3d 596· Fla. 1st DCA· 2013-04-22 ·cited 22×
  Wells Fargo Bank appealed a trial court's dismissal with prejudice of its mortgage foreclosure complaint against the Bohatkas for allegedly lacking standing to foreclose. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that dismissal with prejudice was improper and that the
• Twin Disc v. BIG BUD Tractor, Inc.
  772 F.2d 1329· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-05 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that tort claims for economic loss were barred and that a disclaimer of implied warranties was validly incorporated into the contract.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Blue Rock Shopping Ctr., Inc.
  766 F.2d 744· 3d Cir.· 1985-06-19 ·cited 22×
  A co-maker of a negotiable instrument who has a right of recourse against the primary obligor is considered a surety and can assert the defense of unjustifiable impairment of collateral under UCC § 3-606(1)(b).
• Cedars OF Lebanon Hosp. Corp. v. European X-Ray Distribs. OF Am., Inc.
  444 So. 2d 1068· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-01-24 ·cited 22×
  Cedars of Lebanon Hospital purchased defective x-ray equipment and sued the Swedish manufacturer Saab-Scania for breach of warranty and strict liability despite lack of privity. The court affirmed dismissal of the strict liability claim but reversed dismissal of the warranty clai
• United States v. Vahlco Corp.
  720 F.2d 885· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the future advances clause in the deed of trust unambiguously secured the subsequent line of credit, and that Vahlco's collateral impairment defense was unavailable to a note maker, while Magnum's estoppel defense against the SBA was barred. Therefore, the dir
• Michelin Tires (Canada) Ltd. v. First Nat'l Bank OF Boston
  666 F.2d 673· 1st Cir.· 1981-12-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that an account debtor may have an independent cause of action against an assignee under UCC § 9-318(1)(a) for claims arising from the contract between the account debtor and the assignor.
• LeSUEUR Creamery, Inc. v. Haskon, Inc.
  660 F.2d 342· 8th Cir.· 1981-09-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a jury's negligence verdict can be sustained even with other claims, and that damages must be reduced by the plaintiff's percentage of contributory negligence as required by statute.
• Price Bros. Co. v. Philadelphia Gear Corp.
  649 F.2d 416· 6th Cir.· 1981-05-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a law clerk's off-record view of a machine, even if potentially prejudicial, was harmless error when the trial judge did not rely on it as evidence. It also held that express and implied warranties were not breached because the buyer's specific purchase order
• Bryant v. Jefferson Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n
  509 F.2d 511· D.C. Cir.· 1974-12-09 ·cited 22×·via Uniform Commercial Code § 9-503
  The court held that the constitutional claim presented was insubstantial and did not require a three-judge district court, affirming the lower court's refusal to convene one.
• In re Mitchell v. Shepherd Mall State Bank & Small Bus. Admin.
  458 F.2d 700· 10th Cir.· 1972-04-14 ·cited 22×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  The court held that a security agreement's classification boxes, without explicit granting language, do not create a security interest in collateral not otherwise described.
• Fewox v. The Tallahassee Bank & Tr. Co.
  249 So. 2d 55· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-06-01 ·cited 22×
  A guarantor of loans remains liable even after severing his interest in the borrowing corporation and is not discharged by the bank's extensions of the due dates, because the guarantee was a continuing guaranty of the underlying loans (not merely the notes) and the guarantor did
• Plywood v. The United States
  419 F.2d 425· Ct. Cl.· 1969-12-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Forest Service's representations of timber volume in its prospectus and contract constituted an express warranty, and the plaintiff was entitled to damages for losses incurred due to the undercutting of that volume.
• Slaughter v. The Philadelphia Nat'l Bank
  417 F.2d 21· 3d Cir.· 1969-10-14 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the jury's award of compensatory damages was improper because it was based on the stock's value in June 1963, when PNB lacked control, and there was insufficient evidence of damages for the period PNB was liable. The case is remanded for a new trial on damages
• Schenfeld v. Norton Co.
  391 F.2d 420· 10th Cir.· 1968-03-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court's dismissal of the implied warranty claim was improper and remanded the case for consideration of strict liability in tort under Colorado law.
• Ngoc T. Phan v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co. for First Franklin Mortg. Loan Tr. 2006-FF11
  198 So. 3d 744· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-02-26 ·cited 21×·via Florida Uniform Commercial Code
  Ngoc Phan challenged Deutsche Bank's standing to foreclose on her mortgage, arguing Deutsche Bank lacked possession of her note when filing suit. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the foreclosure judgment, holding that a lender can establish standing through co
• Cavic v. Pioneer Astro Indus., Inc.
  825 F.2d 1421· 10th Cir.· 1987-04-16 ·cited 21×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 2
  The court affirmed the district court's award of commissions and interest, finding that the "purchase agreements" were long-term requirements contracts and that Cavic, as an independent contractor, was not entitled to statutory penalties or fees.
• Suntogs OF Miami, Inc. v. Burroughs Corp.
  433 So. 2d 581· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-05-31 ·cited 21×
  Suntogs of Miami appealed an unfavorable summary judgment in its breach of contract and fraud case against Burroughs Corporation, and sought writs of mandamus and prohibition against Silton Data in a related matter. The appellate court reversed the summary judgment, holding that
• Newton v. Bryan
  433 So. 2d 577· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-05-26 ·cited 21×·via Florida Uniform Commercial Code
  The appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of the Newtons' motion to abate for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding that the promissory note was not required to be performed in Florida.
• The Barnett Bank OF Tallahassee v. Campbell
  402 So. 2d 12· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-06-17 ·cited 21×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  Barnett Bank sought a deficiency judgment against Campbell, a guarantor of a promissory note secured by business equipment and motor vehicles, after the collateral was sold following the debtor corporation's bankruptcy. The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the deficienc
• S. J. Groves & Sons Co. v. Warner Co.
  576 F.2d 524· 3d Cir.· 1978-04-17 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the trial court erred in imposing a duty on the buyer to mitigate damages by engaging a supplemental supplier when the seller also had an equal opportunity and responsibility to do so, especially given the seller's bad faith performance.
• N. Helex Co. v. The United States
  524 F.2d 707· Ct. Cl.· 1975-10-22 ·cited 21×
  The court disagreed with the dissenting judge regarding the deduction of estimated cost savings from the contract price owed by the buyer.
• In re Compton Corp. v. Blue Quail Energy, Inc.
  831 F.2d 586· 5th Cir.· 1987-11-12 ·cited 20×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  A creditor cannot use a letter of credit to secure payment of an unsecured antecedent debt, as this constitutes an indirect preferential transfer recoverable by the bankruptcy trustee.