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

• Steuber Co., Inc. v. Hercules
  646 F.2d 1093· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-05 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting directed verdicts for both defendants because substantial conflicting evidence created jury questions regarding contract terms and liability for contamination.
• Lecates v. Just. OF the Peace Court NO. 4 OF the State OF Del.
  637 F.2d 898· 3d Cir.· 1980-12-30 ·cited 16×
  The Supreme Court's dismissal of a prior case for want of a substantial federal question, under Hicks v. Miranda, binds lower courts on the precise issues presented and decided.
• Automated Med. Labs., Inc. v. Armour Pharm. Co.
  629 F.2d 1118· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-06 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the statute of frauds defense was waived, the Phoenix agreement was a binding contract, and Auto was entitled to prejudgment interest. However, the calculation of damages for Auto's breach of contract needed to be remanded for recalculation.
• The First Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. OF Okla. City v. Iowa Beef Processors, Inc.
  626 F.2d 764· 10th Cir.· 1980-07-14 ·cited 16×
  A secured party's conditional consent to sell collateral, even if conditioned on receiving proceeds, cuts off the security interest if the buyer is in the ordinary course of business. A buyer's claim of set-off is subordinate to a perfected security interest in the proceeds.
• In re Pubs
  618 F.2d 432· 7th Cir.· 1980-03-07 ·cited 16×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  A security interest can attach and be enforceable even if the debtor lacks formal 'rights in the collateral' when the true owner is estopped from denying the security interest's validity.
• Nat'l Papaya Co. v. Domain Indus., Inc.
  592 F.2d 813· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-04 ·cited 16×
  The court held that while the defendant's breach of warranty caused production problems and some lost profits, the plaintiff failed to prove with reasonable certainty that all claimed lost profits were directly caused by the breach, requiring a new trial on damages.
• Warshawsky & Co. v. Arcata Nat'l Corp. & Arcata Graphics Corp.
  552 F.2d 1257· 7th Cir.· 1977-04-15 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by vacating an injunction based on extra-record impressions rather than objective record facts, and that the California action constituted a compulsory counterclaim.
• Randall v. H. Nakashima & Co., Ltd.
  542 F.2d 270· 5th Cir.· 1976-11-12 ·cited 16×
  A federal tax lien attaches to a taxpayer's contract right, even if executory or contingent, if that right has present economic value and is transferable under state law.
• Delmar B. Dennis v. Ford Motor Co.
  471 F.2d 733· 3d Cir.· 1973-01-05 ·cited 16×
  A commercial vehicle owner can recover damages for loss of use even if the vehicle is destroyed and not repairable, as damages should fully compensate for the loss suffered.
• Buschmann v. Prof'l Men's Ass'n
  405 F.2d 659· 7th Cir.· 1969-01-03 ·cited 16×
  A plaintiff may assert a personal cause of action for breach of contract against a defendant, even if the corporation also has a cause of action for the same wrongful acts, when the defendant's breach causes direct and individual harm to the plaintiff.
• Pulte Home Corp., Inc. v. Ply Gem Indus., Inc.
  804 F. Supp. 1471· M.D. Fla.· 1992-09-22 ·cited 15×
  The court found that factual disputes remained, precluding summary judgment on most issues, but denied summary judgment on punitive damages against the defendants. The court also found that Pulte had standing to sue.
• Terry A. Lambert Plumbing, Inc. v. W. Sec. Bank
  934 F.2d 976· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-04 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court correctly granted summary judgment for the bank on all counts of the plaintiff's complaint and on one count of the bank's counterclaim, and correctly denied sanctions.
• United States v. Cent. Bank OF Denver
  843 F.2d 1300· 10th Cir.· 1988-03-31 ·cited 15×
  A bank's unexercised right of setoff against a taxpayer's account does not have priority over a federal tax levy, and a bank's security interest in a general deposit account is not choate for federal priority purposes.
• Pearce v. E.F. Hutton Grp., Inc.
  828 F.2d 826· D.C. Cir.· 1987-09-11 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim against one defendant must be arbitrated, while the claim against the other defendant can be litigated, based on the nature of the dispute and the parties' arguments.
• Pro-Fab, Inc. v. Vipa, Inc.
  772 F.2d 847· 11th Cir.· 1985-10-03 ·cited 15×·via Uniform Commercial Code (Ucc) Article 5
  The court held that Pro-Fab failed to prove fraud and that the bank did not waive defects by prior payments, but remanded the issue of wrongful dishonor due to potentially untimely notice.
• J.E. Stack & Whitney Nat'l Bank v. E.L. Dunn and John C. Nix
  444 So. 2d 935· Fla.· 1984-01-12 ·cited 15×
  The Florida Supreme Court addressed a dispute between competing mineral rights leases and clarified the requirements for achieving bona fide purchaser for value status, particularly regarding what constitutes "irrevocably bound" to pay consideration. The Court quashed the distric
• J.D. Court, Inc. v. United States
  712 F.2d 258· 7th Cir.· 1983-07-05 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the 'choateness doctrine' remains valid under the Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966, and a security interest in accounts receivable is only 'choate' when the receivables come into existence.
• Sahadi v. Cont'l Ill. Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. OF Chicago
  706 F.2d 193· 7th Cir.· 1983-03-31 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because the determination of whether a one-day late tender of interest payment constituted a "material" breach of the loan agreement presented genuine issues of material fact requiring a trial.
• Dragstrem v. Obermeyer
  549 F.2d 20· 7th Cir.· 1977-02-14 ·cited 15×
  A security interest must be protected under local law against any hypothetical judgment lien creditor to have priority over a federal tax lien, even if the government has actual knowledge of the interest.
• Marilyn Kay Fernandez as Administratrix CTA of the Estate of Sam Kay v. Cunningham
  268 So. 2d 166· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-10-24 ·cited 15×
  Attorneys who received a promissory note from their client in partial payment for legal services sought summary judgment for the full note amount against the client's estate. The court reversed, holding that attorneys must prove they are holders in due course under the Uniform Co
• Baraban v. Manatee Nat'l Bank OF Bradenton
  212 So. 2d 341· Fla. 2d DCA· 1968-07-10 ·cited 15×
  The Bank was a holder in due course and not liable under the Blue Sky Laws because it did not have actual knowledge of any defect in the note or participate in the fraudulent sale of securities.
• Magloire R. Isaac and Marie R. Isaac v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co. for the Certificate Holders of Soundview Home Loan Tr. 2006-Opt5 Asset-Backed Certificates
  74 So. 3d 495· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-04-06 ·cited 14×
  Deutsche Bank sought to foreclose on a mortgage and was granted summary judgment. The appellants challenged whether Deutsche Bank had standing to foreclose, arguing it failed to adequately document its ownership of the mortgage and note. The court held that Deutsche Bank establis
• Tech. Packaging, Inc. v. Hanchett
  992 So. 2d 309· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-09-26 ·cited 14×
  Technical Packaging sued its former attorney Richard Hanchett and his firm for legal malpractice, alleging Hanchett provided incorrect statute of limitations advice that caused its lawsuit against supplier UCB Films to be untimely. The trial court granted summary judgment for the
• Fla. Mining & Materials Corp. v. Standard Gypsum Corp.
  550 So. 2d 47· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-08-23 ·cited 14×
  A contract addendum's language was insufficient to grant a seller consequential damages for loss of business, as limited by the Uniform Commercial Code.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Turner
  869 F.2d 270· 6th Cir.· 1989-02-17 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge would hold that Turner's negligence in executing the guaranty in blank substantially contributed to its alteration, precluding his defense under Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-3-406.
• Riddell v. Riddell Wash. Corp.
  866 F.2d 1480· D.C. Cir.· 1989-02-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims for conversion, UCC violation, breach of contract, and wrongful transfer were time-barred. The dissent argued that the district court's findings regarding the plaintiff's knowledge of the Buchanan Appraisal were reasonable and that the R
• J.J. Ryan & Sons, Inc. v. Rhone Poulenc Textile, S.A.
  863 F.2d 315· 4th Cir.· 1988-12-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that all disputes arising in connection with the distribution contracts, including those labeled as conspiracy, unfair trade practices, tortious interference, conversion, abuse of process, libel, defamation, and injurious falsehood, are subject to arbitration under
• Trans World Metals, Inc. v. Southwire Co.
  769 F.2d 902· 2d Cir.· 1985-08-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the seller's late delivery did not substantially impair the contract's value, and the buyer's repudiation constituted a breach, entitling the seller to damages based on the contract/market price differential.
• Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Major Tool & Mach., Inc.
  767 F.2d 446· 8th Cir.· 1985-07-08 ·cited 14×
  Economic losses arising from commercial transactions are not recoverable under tort theories of negligence or strict products liability, except for personal injury or damage to other property.
• Dorothy M. Farish for Shirley F. Farish v. Courion Indus., Inc.
  754 F.2d 1111· 4th Cir.· 1985-02-11 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the anti-privity statute was intended to apply to the cases, reversing the majority's decision.
• Alexander v. Conveyors & Dumpers, Inc.
  731 F.2d 1221· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the jury instructions on assumption of risk were proper, and the breach of warranty claims were correctly barred by the statute of limitations.
• United States v. Jones
  707 F.2d 1334· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-24 ·cited 14×
  Federal law, specifically SBA regulations, pre-empts state law and prevents a private guarantor from claiming pro rata contribution from the SBA, as the SBA is explicitly not a co-guarantor.
• Gillette Dairy, Inc. v. Mallard Mfg. Corp.
  707 F.2d 351· 8th Cir.· 1983-05-24 ·cited 14×
  A breach of warranty claim seeking only economic loss is governed solely by the UCC statute of limitations, not the products liability statute.
• O'Brien v. ELI Lilly & Co.
  668 F.2d 704· 3d Cir.· 1981-12-28 ·cited 14×
  The court concurred with the majority opinion, affirming the dismissal based on the statute of limitations.
• Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Squires Dev. Corp.
  387 So. 2d 986· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-08-01 ·cited 14×
  This consolidated appeal involves two related lawsuits arising from defective wood paneling installed in a condominium office unit. The court reversed judgments totaling approximately $39,000 against Georgia-Pacific Corporation (the manufacturer) and remanded for consolidation an
• James v. Ford Motor Credit Co. & Del Norte Motor Co.
  638 F.2d 147· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-24 ·cited 14×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, concluding that the 1980 Truth in Lending Act amendments, when read in pari materia with the 1968 Act, indicate Congress did not intend to impose civil penalties for the type of nondisclosure at issue.
• Barsco, Inc. v. H.W.W., Inc.
  346 So. 2d 134· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-05-26 ·cited 14×
  Barsco appeals the denial of its motion for summary judgment in a garnishment action against Atlantic Bank of West Jacksonville. The court affirmed the bank's right to exercise a contractual set-off against the defendant's deposit account based on the defendant's default under th
• S. Cent. Livestock Dealers, Inc. v. Sec. State Bank OF Hedley
  551 F.2d 1346· 5th Cir.· 1977-05-12 ·cited 14×
  The court held that Texas law may prohibit a bank from offsetting funds in a debtor's account if the bank knows the funds belong to third parties and are held in a fiduciary capacity, even if not an express trust.
• Bossier Bank & Tr. Co. v. Union Planters Nat'l Bank OF Memphis
  550 F.2d 1077· 6th Cir.· 1977-03-07 ·cited 14×·via Uniform Commercial Code (Ucc) Article 5
  The court held that a bank issuing a letter of credit must honor a draft that complies with the credit's terms, even if the underlying contract had issues, and that attorney fees and additional interest are not recoverable as incidental damages under the relevant statutes.
• Berwind Corp. v. Litton Indus., Inc.
  532 F.2d 1· 7th Cir.· 1976-02-26 ·cited 14×
  An exculpatory clause in a commercial contract, located within a warranty section and lacking specific mention of negligence, does not clearly and unequivocally limit liability for the seller's negligence under Illinois law.
• First Nat'l Bank OF Sikeston v. Transamerica Ins. Co.
  514 F.2d 981· 8th Cir.· 1975-04-17 ·cited 14×
  A fidelity bond is terminated as to an employee once the insured learns of any dishonest or fraudulent act by that employee, even if the act itself did not directly cause the loss.
• EAC Credit Corp. v. King
  507 F.2d 1232· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-12 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the jury could reasonably interpret the term 'accounts receivable' in the guaranty to include chattel paper, and that the evidence supported the jury's finding that the Porters' guaranty covered the transactions in Counts I and II. However, the court reversed
• Handelman v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  509 F.2d 1067· 2d Cir.· 1975-01-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the $95,000 received was ordinary income, not capital gain, because no sale or exchange of the stock occurred, and that entertainment expense deductions were not allowable under I.R.C. § 274 due to insufficient substantiation and primary business use.
• Int'l Harvester Credit Corp. & Fla. Truck & Tractor Co. v. Am. Nat'l Bank OF Jacksonville
  296 So. 2d 32· Fla.· 1974-02-13 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Supreme Court addressed two UCC questions certified by the First District Court of Appeal regarding farm equipment financing and security interest priorities. The Court held that the farm equipment exemption from filing requirements applies to individual items under $
• Donald v. Madison Indus., Inc.
  483 F.2d 837· 10th Cir.· 1973-08-28 ·cited 14×
  A security interest in after-acquired property, including inventory, can have priority over a federal tax lien if it meets the requirements of the Federal Lien Act of 1966, even if the property was not fully manufactured at the time the tax lien was filed.
• In re Fuqua v. First Nat'l Bank OF Howard
  461 F.2d 1186· 10th Cir.· 1972-06-13 ·cited 14×·via Uniform Commercial Code Article 9
  A financing statement describing collateral as 'All Personal Property' is insufficient under the Kansas Uniform Commercial Code because it lacks the required specificity to identify the collateral.
• In re Varney Wood Prods., Inc. v. J. Glenwood Strickler in Bankr. for Varney Wood Prods., Inc.
  458 F.2d 435· 4th Cir.· 1972-04-06 ·cited 14×
  A financing statement describing collateral as 'accounts receivable' is sufficient to perfect a security interest in the proceeds of a contract, under the Uniform Commercial Code's notice filing system.
• VAL Decker Packing Co. v. Corn Prods. Sales Co.
  411 F.2d 850· 6th Cir.· 1969-06-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the four-year statute of limitations under the Ohio Uniform Commercial Code applies to actions for breach of implied warranty in a sales contract, overriding general statutes of limitations for injuries to person or property.
• Brown v. Hall
  221 So. 2d 454· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-04-18 ·cited 14×
  Brown, an employee of a service station, was injured while servicing a used truck that Hall had sold to Scott. Brown sued Hall for negligence and breach of implied warranty. The court held that while an implied warranty of fitness exists for used goods when the seller knows the b
• In re Yale Express Sys., Inc. v. Yale Express Sys., Inc.
  384 F.2d 990· 2d Cir.· 1967-11-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse equitable discretion in denying Fruehauf's claims for reclamation or rental payments.