Preface 18 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The official text (with comments) of the Uniform Commercial Code embodies more than nine-hundred pages. Its sweeping scope and complexities may appear to discourage summarizing into a Nutshell format. Yet the need to view the Code with some perspective is manifest. This Nutshell endeavors to meet this need.
- Second, every Code rule and comment stated is backed up by the relevant UCC citation. Accordingly, the reader—whether law student or practitioner—is given entŕee to the Code itself so that an independent judgment may be made as to the rule and application under consideration. Further, the cite will afford ready entŕee to a study in depth. For instance, once a relevant UCC cite is obtained, all reported case law construing the language can be located through such publications as the Uniform Laws Annotated—Uniform Commercial Code and the Uniform Commercial Code Reporting Service. The UCC cite also will give ready entŕee to the massive legal literature that discusses the Code. On occasion this Nutshell will refer to J. White, R. Summers, Handbook of the Law Under the Uniform Commercial Code (6th ed., Student Edition, 2010) (cited as UCC Hornbook), Gregory M. Travalio, Robert J. Nordstrom & Albert L. Clovis, Nordstrom on Sales & Leases of Goods (2d ed., Aspen 2000) (cited as Sales...
- “The Uniform Commercial Code should be construed in accordance with its underlying purposes and policies. The text of each section should be read in the light of the purpose and policy of the rule or principle in question, as also of the Uniform Commercial Code as a whole, and the application of the language should be construed narrowly or broadly, as the case may be, in conformity with the purposes and policies involved.” Comment 1 to Uniform Commercial Code § 1–103.
- of the articles of the Uniform Commercial Code to be revised.)
- Subsequent to the publication of the first edition, the 1978 UCC was promulgated. Other developments included the promulgation of the Restatement (Second) of Contracts, the enactment of the Bankruptcy Reform Act, and the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act. Further, a revised Uniform Consumer Credit Code was promulgated. The second edition reflected those developments.
- Open Chapter
Part Six. The Entire Transaction Made Pursuant to a Letter of Credit 50 results (showing 5 best matches)
- This nutshell should provide a base from which both law students and practitioners can embark on an enlightened study of the Uniform Commercial Code.
- King, Kuenzel, Stone & Knight, Commercial Transactions under the Uniform Commercial Code 382 outlines the above letter-of-credit transaction thus: Reprinted from King, Barnhizer, Knight, Payne, Starnes & Stone, Commercial Transactions Under the Uniform Commercial Code and Other Laws, with permission. Copyright 2011 Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of the LexisNexis® Group. All rights reserved.
- This nutshell confirms the statement in the General Comment to the Code that “[t]his Act purports to deal with all the phases which may ordinarily arise in the handling of a commercial transaction, from start to finish.” These phases involved (1) selling or leasing goods; (2) paying for goods with negotiable instruments or wire transfers; (3) shipping and storing goods covered by documents of title; (4) financing the sale of goods: the secured transaction; and (5) constructing the entire commercial transaction pursuant to a letter of credit.
- The concept of the Uniform Commercial Code is that “commercial transactions” is a single subject of the law notwithstanding its many facets. This is best illustrated by the commercial transaction made pursuant to a letter of credit, the subject of UCC Article 5. §§ 5–101 and Comment, 5–102(a)(10) (“letter of credit” defined). In this letter-of-credit transaction, the goods are sold per Article 2. A draft is issued per Article 3 and collected per Article 4. A bill of lading is issued per Article 7. The goods are financed per Article 9. Thus, “every phase of commerce involved is but a part of one transaction, namely, the sale of and payment for goods.” General Comment to UCC.
- For additional information on the UNCITRAL Convention on Independent Guarantees and Standby Letters of Credit, as well as the International Chamber of Commerce’s Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees (URDG) and International Standby Practices ISP98, see Kristen David Adams, Commercial Transactions 18–10—18–12 (2007).
- Open Chapter
Introduction 37 results (showing 5 best matches)
- In order to permit the continued expansion of commercial practices, the Code drafters adopted a philosophy of open-ended drafting, with room for courts to move in and readjust over the decades. K. Llewellyn, The Common Law Tradition 183, note 186 (1960). Thus, in the main, the Code was not drafted in the manner a conveyancer would. Llewellyn called these persons “The metes and bounds boys.” Instead, as Comment 1 to § 1–103 states, “The Uniform Commercial Code is drawn to provide flexibility so that, since it is intended to be a semi-permanent and infrequently-amended piece of legislation, it will provide its own machinery for expansion of commercial practices. It is intended to make it possible for the law embodied in the Uniform Commercial Code to be applied by the courts in the light of unforeseen and new circumstances and practices. The proper construction of the Uniform Commercial Code requires, of course, that its interpretation and application be limited to its reason.”
- Obviously, every phase of commerce outlined above is but part of one transaction, namely, the sale of and payment for goods. Accordingly, the Uniform Commercial Code purports to deal with all the phases that may ordinarily arise in the handling of a commercial transaction, from start to finish. See the General Comment to the UCC, § 10–102. Note that the above five phases of a commercial transaction form the organizational basis for this nutshell. Note also that Part Two deals with
- But what if a fact situation appears to fit the factual preconditions of a Code rule but is not within the reason of the rule? Instead of misconstruing the language of the rule to exclude the fact situation, the Code gives authority to a court, not to mishandle the textual Code rule, but to say this factual situation is different in terms of its reason and therefore the court need not apply the rule. See S. Mentschikoff, Commercial Transactions 11 (1970). Thus, Comment 1 to § 1–103 says, “[Courts have] disregarded a statutory limitation of remedy where the reason of the limitation did not applyTTTT Nothing in the Uniform Commercial Code stands in the way of the continuance of such action by the courts.” See also §§ 1–104 (implied repeal), 1–105 (severability), 1–305 (remedies), 10–103 (general repealer).
- In the early 1940s, it was recognized that the above uniform acts needed substantial revision to keep them in step with modern commercial practices. Further, since each of the above uniform acts had become a segment of the statutory law relating to commercial transactions, there was a need to integrate each of such acts with the others.
- The concept of the Uniform Commercial Code is that “commercial transactions” is a single subject of the law, notwithstanding its many facets:
- Open Chapter
Part Three. The Process of Paying for Goods With Negotiable Instruments 442 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Reprinted from King, Barnhizer, Knight, Payne, Starnes & Stone, Commercial Transactions Under the Uniform Commercial Code and Other Laws, with permission. Copyright 2011 Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of the LexisNexis® Group. All rights reserved.
- Recall from the introduction to this nutshell that a “commercial transaction” may involve not only the sale of goods, but also the giving of a check or draft for all or part of the purchase price. Further, the check or draft may be “negotiated” and ultimately pass through one or more banks for collection. This Part deals with negotiable instruments and the bank operations related to them.
- In the context of consumer goods, however, some courts and legislatures believed it inappropriate to have a buyer’s defenses cut off by a holder in due course, and thus limited or precluded holder-in-due-course status. Statutes having this effect are often entitled, Retail Installment Sales Act, Home Improvement Finance Act, etc. An illustrative statute is Uniform Consumer Credit Code § 3.307 [Certain Negotiable Instruments Prohibited] (1974) which states,
- “[Section 9–403(b)] is subject to law … which establishes a different rule for an account debtor who is an individual and who incurred the obligation primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.” § 9–403(e). One such law is Uniform Consumer Credit Code § 3.404 (Assignee Subject to Claims and Defenses], subsection (1) of which states,
- [Note: The collection of items (e.g., checks) is governed by Article 4, agreement of the parties, clearing-house rules, and Federal Reserve regulations and operating circulars. §§ 4–102 (applicability of Article 4), 4–103(a) and (b) (variation by agreement and clearing-house and federal guidance). “Regulation J, 12 CFR 210, governs the rights of parties in the collection process through the Federal Reserve Banks. Originally Regulation J prescribed rules similar to Article 4; a number of the rules, however, have been changed by Regulation CC.” UCC Hornbook § 18–5, p. 850. Note also the Expedited Funds Availability Act, 12 U.S.C. § 4000 et seq., and its implementing Regulation CC, 12 CFR Pt. 229, which provide, restrictions on the length of time banks may hold a customer’s funds after checks are deposited. These supersede “any provision of the law of any state, including the Uniform Commercial Code …, which is inconsistent with
- Open Chapter
Part Four. Shipping and Storing Goods Covered by Documents of Title 175 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The above may be diagrammed thus: Copyright © 1997, by Matthew Bender & Co., Inc., and reprinted with permission from King, Kuenzel, Stone, Commercial Transactions Under the Uniform Commercial Code: Cases and Materials, 5th Edition.
- Recall from the introduction to this nutshell that a “commercial transaction” dealing with the sale of and payment for goods, may also involve the shipment or storage of goods covered by a bill of lading or warehouse receipt, that is, a document of title. Such documents of title are the subject of Article 7. § 7–101.
- For a list of laws repealed by Article 7 (e.g. Uniform Bills of Lading Act, Uniform Warehouse Receipts Act, and Uniform Sales Act), see § 10–102(1). For the relation of Article 7 to a treaty or statute (e.g., FBLA, UETA, E–SIGN), see §§ 7–103, 1–108 (re: E–SIGN).
- Damage to, or delay, loss, or destruction of, the goods for which the bailee is not liable excuses delivery to a person entitled under the document. § 7–403(a)(2). This rule is, in essence, a cross-reference to the entire body of tort law determining the varying responsibilities and standards of care applicable to commercial bailees. § 7–403 Comment 3. The Code spells out the minimum standards thus: Warehouses and carriers must exercise the degree of care that “a reasonably careful person would exercise under similar circumstances.” §§ 7–204(a) and (d), 7–309(a). States and the federal government may apply more rigid standards, e.g., absolute liability of common carriers, with certain enumerated exceptions (act of God, act of public enemy, act of shipper, act of public authority, or inherent nature of the goods). § 7–103. See UCC Hornbook §§ 28–3, 29–3 (Practitioner’s Edition).
- When a document of title—especially a negotiable one—is utilized in a commercial transaction, there are several consequences under Articles 2, 7 and 9:
- Open Chapter
Part Five. Financing the Sale of Goods: The Secured Transaction 409 results (showing 5 best matches)
- SP–1 has priority over LC because SP–1 perfected by filing prior to LC’s becoming a lien creditor. SP–1’s security interest attached on May 1 (§ 9–203(a)) and was perfected by filing on May 2. LC became a lien creditor on May 5. Rule: “A security interest … is subordinate to the rights of … a person that becomes a lien creditor before … the security interest is … perfected.” § 9–317(a)(2). And by implication and per § 9–201, a subordinate to the rights of a person who becomes a lien creditor the security interest is perfected. Section 9–201(a) states, “Except as otherwise provided in [the Uniform Commercial Code], a security agreement is effective according to its terms between the parties, against purchasers of the collateral, and against creditors.” The Code does provide otherwise as to
- [2.] Consumer installment sales and consumer loans present special problems of a nature which makes special regulation of them inappropriate in a general commercial codification. Many states now regulate such loans and sales under small loan acts, retail installment selling acts and the like. [See, e.g., Uniform Consumer Credit Code. Under revised § 9–101 Comment 4.j., see also reference to consumer and consumer goods transactions.] …
- J. White & R. Summers, Uniform Commercial Code § 30–3 at 20 (5th Practitioner’s Ed., 2002) ask,
- The introduction to this nutshell explained that a “commercial transaction” may involve not only a contract for sale of goods followed by a sale and the giving of a check or draft for a part of the purchase price, but also the acceptance of some form of
- Summary: “[T]he key feature that distinguishes leases from [secured installment] sales [is] the lessor’s retention of a meaningful residual…. In determining whether a purchase option is ‘nominal’ … [t]he correct analysis should be to determine whether, small (or nominal) in relation to the anticipated value at the expiration of the term of the lease that the lessee would (or should) be economically compelled to exercise the option. Under these circumstances, the exercise of the option is (or should be) a foregone conclusion and the lease should be characterized as a secured transaction.” Bayer, Personal Property Leasing: Article 2A of the Uniform Commercial Code, 43 Bus. Law. 1491 at 1496 (1988) [Emphasis added]. Notably, having the lessee assume incidences of ownership (such as paying insurance) during the lease does not transform the transaction into a sale. See § 1–203(c).
- Open Chapter
Title Page 3 results
Part One. The Process of Selling Goods Part 2 168 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Under current Article 8, the rules of contract law interpretation may be found by applying non-Code law. See § 1–103(b) and former § 8–107 Comment 2. It is sometimes also appropriate to look to Article 2 by analogy. To make this latter point clear, Comment 1 to § 2–105 states, “ ‘Investment securities’ are expressly excluded from the coverage of [Article 2, Sales of Goods]…. It is not intended by this exclusion, however, to prevent the application of a particular section of [Article 2] … by analogy to securities … when the reason of that section makes such application sensible and the situation involved is not covered by [Article 8, Investment Securities]….” More broadly, Comment 1 to § 1–103 states, “[C]ourts have often recognized that the policies embodied in an act are applicable in reason to subject-matter that was not expressly included in the language of the act…. and did the same where reason and policy so required, even where the subject-matter had been intentionally... ...in...
- UCC Article 8, Investment Securities, (e.g., stocks and bonds, as “security” is defined in § 8–102(a)(15)) does not fit within what is normally considered the Code’s main purpose: to deal with the normal phases in the handling of a commercial transaction relating to the sale of The General Comment to the UCC nevertheless provides this rationale for including investment securities in the Code: “If, instead of goods in the ordinary sense, the transaction involved stocks or bonds, some of the phases of the transaction would obviously be different. Others would be the same. In addition, there are certain additional formalities incident to the transfer of stocks and bonds from one owner to another.”
- Assume S has identified goods to the contract (see § 2–501) and is about to deliver the goods to B when B repudiates. As we will see presently, S will probably resell the goods and seek to recover from B the difference between the resale price and the contract price. § 2–706. But what if the goods to be sold are not yet identified to the contract or are unfinished? May S identify the goods or complete the unfinished goods, then resell them and recover from B the difference between the resale price and the contract price? In answer to these questions, Uniform Sales Act § 64(4) stated that “the buyer shall be liable to the seller for no greater damages than the seller would have suffered if he did nothing towards carrying ...could prove to be unfair and lead to economically wasteful results. Thus, the UCC gives the aggrieved S the right to identify to the contract any conforming finished goods in S’s possession or control regardless of their resalability. §§ 2–703(c) [§ 2–703(2)(c)...
- In example (delivery to insolvent B), it appears that the answer and analysis should be the same as in examples Some difficulty arose because § 2–702(3) of the 1962 Code, which allowed A to reclaim from B, stated, “The seller’s right to reclaim … is subject to the rights of a buyer in ordinary course or other good faith purchaser under this Article (Section 2–403).” This italicized language was read in at least two ways: (1) A’s right to reclaim was subject to C’s interest as a lien creditor, and (2) C’s rights were to be determined by § 2–403, which, except for a cross reference in subsection (4), did not discuss lien creditor rights. Accordingly, a court could look to pre-Code law by application of § 1–103 to determine A’s rights as against C. In most, but not all, states, prior to the Code, A, the defrauded seller, prevailed over C, a lien creditor of B. In 1966, § 2–702(3) was amended to delete “or lien creditor,” with the intention of having A prevail over C. If C is B’s...
- In addition, the UCC demonstrates a more liberal attitude than some courts have shown in connection with specific performance of sales contracts. Thus, in view of UCC Article 2’s emphasis on the commercial feasibility of replacement, a new perspective as to what are “unique” goods has been introduced. First, specific performance is no longer limited to goods already ascertained at the time of contracting; second, the determination of uniqueness must consider the total contract situation. Output and requirements contracts involving a particular or peculiarly available source or market are typical commercial specific performance situations today. § 2–716 Comments 1 and 2; see § 2–306. Example of output contract: “The seller hereby agrees to sell and deliver, and the buyer hereby agrees to purchase, accept, and pay for, all of the seller’s output of [ ).” In each example, suppose the described goods are available only in a particular or peculiarly available market. If Seller repudiates,...
- Open Chapter
Part Two. The Process of Leasing Goods 243 results (showing 5 best matches)
- In May 2011, the American Law Institute withdrew the 2003 Amendments to Article 2A of the Uniform Commercial Code. Consequently, this Part will continue to present pre-2003 Article 2A. In brackets, however, the changes under Amended (2003) Article 2A are set forth for informational purposes. This Part does reflect Revised (2001) Article 1, General Provisions.
- in any respect
- Section 2A–308 governs transfers and preferences claimed to be fraudulent. § 2A–301 Comment 4(e). Subsection (1) states that a creditor of a lessor who is in possession of goods subject to a lease may treat the lease as void if, as against the creditor, Lessor’s retention of possession is fraudulent under any statute or rule of law, e.g., Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, or Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act. Note, however, that retention of possession of goods for a commercially reasonable time
- “If the goods are unfinished … an aggrieved lessor or the supplier may either  complete manufacture and wholly identify the goods to the lease contract or  cease manufacture and lease, sell, or otherwise dispose of the goods for scrap or salvage value or  proceed in any other reasonable manner.” § 2A–524(2). This rule is intended to minimize loss and promote effective realization in the exercise of reasonable commercial judgment. Cf. §§ 2–703(c) [2–703(2)(c) (2003)], 2–704 at pp. 122–123.
- 2. Absent a prohibition or default provision in the prime lease contract, A might be able to argue that the sublease to C materially increases A’s risk; thus, while B’s interest under the prime lease may be transferred under the sublease to C, A may have a remedy pursuant to § 2A–303(4). §§ 2A–303(2), 2A–303(4)(b)(ii). Cf. Bankruptcy Code § 365(b)(1) (executory contracts and unexpired leases); cf. §§ 2–210(6) [2–210(2)(c) (2003)] (assignment that delegates performance), 2–609 (right to adequate assurance of performance). See also § 9–403 through 9–406 (assignment under Article 9); § 9–407 (restrictions on assignment) and Comments 2 and 3.
- Open Chapter
Part One. The Process of Selling Goods 417 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The UCC rejects both the “lay-dictionary” and the “conveyancer’s” reading of a commercial agreement. Instead, the Code determines the meaning of the agreement by the language the parties used and by their actions, read and interpreted in the light of commercial practices and other surrounding circumstances. The commercial context sets the measure and background for interpretation and may explain and supplement even the language of a formal or final writing. § 1–303 Comment 1.
- directly to the law of commercial transactions as set forth in the UCC. The Code does recognize, however, that a party with an insurable interest in goods can sue third parties for injury to the goods. § 2–722.
- Contract principles are modified in a home solicitation sale (door-to-door sale) by allowing a buyer to cancel the sale by midnight of the third business day after the date of the transaction. 16 CFR Part 429, Uniform Consumer Credit Code (UCCC) § 2.501 et seq. (1968), UCCC § 3.501 et seq. (1974). CISG 2(a).
- [Prefatory Note: In May 2011, the American Law Institute withdrew the 2003 Amendments to Article 2 from the Official Text of the Uniform Commercial Code. Consequently, this Part One will continue to present pre-2003 Article 2. In brackets, however, the proposed changes under Amended (2003) Article 2 are set forth for informational purposes. This Part One does reflect Revised (2001) Article 1 General Provisions and Revised (2003) Article 7 Documents of Title. As to the relation of Articles 1 and 2 to Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E–SIGN), see §§ 1–108 and Comments, 2–108(4) and Comment 5; as to Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA), see § UETA 3(b)(2) and Comments 4 and 7.]
- The above chart shows an essential similarity between the implied warranty of merchantability and strict liability in tort. For example, whether a good or condition qualifies as “fit for its ordinary purpose” and “a defective condition unreasonably dangerous” may be similar tests. Of course, under strict liability in tort, the cause of action is not affected by any disclaimer, nor is the plaintiff required to give notice of the injury. However, under the Code, limitation of consequential damages for injury to the person is prima facie . In addition, the notice requirement is intended to defeat commercial bad faith, not to deprive a good faith consumer of a remedy. Thus, in many if not most instances, an injured consumer could recover under either the Code or under strict liability in tort, even without demonstrating privity or negligence in the preparation and sale of defective goods. Differences between the statutes of limitations, of course, could cause some difficulty. See Part...
- Open Chapter
Copyright Page 4 results
- Nutshell Series, In a Nutshell
- Thomson Reuters created this publication to provide you with accurate and authoritative information concerning the subject matter covered. However, this publication was not necessarily prepared by persons licensed to practice law in a particular jurisdiction. Thomson Reuters does not render legal or other professional advice, and this publication is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. If you require legal or other expert advice, you should seek the services of a competent attorney or other professional.
- Printed in the United States of America
- © West, a Thomson business, 2002, 2005, 2008
- Open Chapter
Part Five. Financing the Sale of Goods: The Secured Transaction Part 2 314 results (showing 5 best matches)
- As to consumer protection legislation restricting deficiency judgments in consumer credit sales, see Uniform Consumer Credit Code (1974) (UCCC) § 5.103. See also
- 2. “A disposition of collateral is made in a commercially reasonable manner if the disposition is made: (1) in the usual manner on any recognized market; (2) at the price current in any recognized market at the time of the disposition; or (3) otherwise in conformity with reasonable commercial practices among dealers in the type of property that was the subject of the disposition. § 9–627(b) and Comment 4.
- . If, within the 20-day period, LC, a creditor of Payee, acquires a lien in the note by attachment, levy, or the like, SP–1 has priority over LC (and LC’s federal counterpart, the trustee in bankruptcy). §§ 9–201(a), 9–317(a)(2)(A), 9–102(a)(52)(“lien creditor” defined as including bankruptcy trustee); see Bankruptcy Code § 544(a).
- Commercial tort claim.
- . If, within the 20-day period, LC, a creditor of D, acquires a lien on the certificate by attachment, levy, or the like, SP–1 has priority over LC (and LC’s federal counterpart, the trustee in bankruptcy). §§ 9–201(a), 9–317(a)(2)(A), 9–102(a)(52) (“lien creditor” defined as including bankruptcy trustee); see Bankruptcy Code § 544(a).
- Open Chapter
Part Three. The Process of Paying for Goods With Negotiable Instruments Part 2 73 results (showing 5 best matches)
- A drawee who pays an instrument on which the drawer’s signature is forged (as contrasted with a forged recover the payment from the presenter, notwithstanding the general rule allowing recovery of monies paid by mistake. Reason: Drawee Bank is in a superior position to detect a forgery because it has the drawer’s signature on file (Drawer signed signature card when Drawer opened checking account with Drawee) and is expected to know and compare it. A less fictional rationalization is that it is highly desirable to end the transaction when the instrument is paid rather than reopen and upset a series of commercial transactions at a later date when the forgery is discovered. Former § 3–418 Comment 1. Note that the drawee is not in a superior position to detect a forged indorsement or an alteration, and thus the drawee is entitled to recover from the presenter under the general rule allowing recovery of monies paid by mistake.
- be asserted against a person who took the instrument in good faith and for value (or who in good faith changed position in reliance on the payment). “[T]he drawee in most cases will not have a remedy against the person paid because there is usually a person who took the check in good faith and for value or who in good faith changed position in reliance on the payment.” §§ 3–418(c) and Comment 1, 1–201(b)(20) (“good faith” defined), 3–103(a)(6) (same), 3–303 (“value” defined). Even so, all is not lost. Below, we consider how presentment warranties may provide a remedy. § 3–418(c) (second sentence).
- If a drawee accepts an item on the mistaken belief that (i) payment had not been stopped or (ii) the drawer’s signature was authorized, the drawee may revoke its acceptance. In other cases of mistake (e.g., Drawer has no account with Drawee or there are insufficient funds in the account), the drawee may revoke its acceptance. § 3–418(a), (b). However, revocation of acceptance may be asserted against a person who took the item in good faith and for value, as is most often the case, or who in good faith changed position in reliance on the payment. § 3–418(c).
- Assume Drawee makes payment over Drawer’s forged signature to the forger himself or to a person who either takes the item with knowledge of the forgery or obtains this knowledge after taking the item but before presenting it. Pre-UCC rule: Even though Drawee was in a superior position to detect the forgery, Drawee may recover from this presenter. Former UCC rule: Drawee may recover from Presenter because payment is not final to a Presenter who is not either a holder in due course per § 3–302 or a person who in good faith changed his position in reliance on the payment. If, however, Presenter took the item as a holder in due course but obtained
- Example 2: Corporation A issues a stock certificate to B in return for B’s promissory note, which was never paid. B sells the stock certificate to C. A state statute provides, “[N]o corporation shall issue any certificates of shares of stock until the corporation has received the par value thereof.” Stock issued in violation of this provision is voidable at the election of the corporation. Will A be able to assert this defect against C? No. “A security … even though issued with a defect going to its validity, is valid in the hands of a purchaser for value and without notice of a particular defect.” § 8–202(b)(1); cf. § 3–305(a)(2) and (b) and Comment 2 (instruments issued for which promised performance has not been given.)
- Open Chapter
Outline 145 results (showing 5 best matches)
- B. Pre-Code Personal Property Security Law
- (c) Unusual Circumstances in Which a Holder Does Not Become a Holder in Due Course
- (ii) Personal Defenses Available at Common Law in an Action to Enforce a Right to Payment Under a Simple Contract
- C. Certain Cases In Which Transferee or Consignee’s Rights in a Nonnegotiable Document May Be Defeated
- (a) In a Proper Case, Buyer May Obtain Specific Performance
- Open Chapter
Index 15 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Publication Date: May 3rd, 2012
- ISBN: 9780314277442
- Subject: Commercial Law
- Series: Nutshells
- Type: Overviews
- Description: This product provides a concise yet comprehensive introduction to the Uniform Commercial Code for students and practitioners alike. It covers each major topic of the Code, including the process of selling, payment, negotiation, shipping, storage, financing sales, and leasing of goods. In addition, the text makes it possible for readers to see how the various articles of the Code may interact in a single transaction. Wherever practicable, the actual language of the Code and its comments has been used. The comprehensive outline, references to relevant authority, and intuitive system of cross-referencing all contribute to its ease of use. This eighth edition contains the 2010 Amendments to Article 9, with an effective date of July 1, 2013.