(1) “Goods” means all things (including specially manufactured goods) which are movable at the time of identification to the contract for sale other than the money in which the price is to be paid, investment securities (Article 8) and things in action. “Goods” also includes the unborn young of animals and growing crops and other identified things attached to realty as described in the section on goods to be severed from realty (Section 7-2-107).
(2) Goods must be both existing and identified before any interest in them can pass. Goods which are not both existing and identified are “future goods”. A purported present sale of future goods or of any interest therein operates as a contract to sell.
(3) There may be a sale of a part interest in existing identified goods.
(4) An undivided share in an identified bulk of fungible goods is sufficiently identified to be sold although the quantity of the bulk is not determined. Any agreed proportion of such a bulk or any quantity thereof agreed upon by number, weight or other measure may to the extent of the seller’s interest in the bulk be sold to the buyer who then becomes an owner in common.
(5) “Lot” means a parcel or a single article which is the subject matter of a separate sale or delivery, whether or not it is sufficient to perform the contract.
(6) “Commercial unit” means such a unit of goods as by commercial usage is a single whole for purposes of sale and division of which materially impairs its character or value on the market or in use. A commercial unit may be a single article (as a machine) or a set of articles (as a suite of furniture or an assortment of sizes) or a quantity (as a bale, gross, or carload) or any other unit treated in use or in the relevant market as a single whole.
(Acts 1965, No. 549, p. 811.)
Notes of Decisions
Keck v. Dryvit Sys., Inc., 830 So. 2d 1 (Ala. 2002).
· cites it 3× “Paragraph 1, Official Comment to § 7-2-105, Ala.Code 1975. Thus, in order to be considered a product within the meaning of the UCC, the EIFS must be capable of severance from the Kecks' home without causing material harm to the home.”
Clark v. Jim Walter Homes, Inc., 719 F. Supp. 1037 (M.D. Ala. 1989).
· cites it 3× “§ 2-105 (or its Alabama equivalent, 1975 Code of Ala. § 7-2-105), which emphasizes mobility at the time of identification to the contract, and the definition of “consumer goods” under U.”
RMS Tech., Inc. v. TDY Indus., Inc., 64 F. App'x 853 (4th Cir. 2003).
“” Ala.Code Ann. § 7-2-105(1). It defines the sale of goods as “the passing of title from the seller to the buyer for a price.”
Scott v. Dixie Homecrafters, 125 F. Supp. 2d 1311 (M.D. Ala. 2000).
“Code § 7-2-105 (1975). Therefore, the Alabama Commercial Code applies.”
Henig Furs, Inc. v. JC Penney Co., Inc., 811 F. Supp. 1546 (M.D. Ala. 1993).
· cites it 2× “See Ala.Code § 7-2-105, 7-2-106 (1975). The UCC provides that “a contract for the sale of goods may be made in any manner sufficient to show agreement----” Ala.”
Gordon v. Acrocrete, Inc., 400 F. Supp. 2d 1310 (S.D. Ala. 2005).
· cites it 2× “2002) (citing Official Comment to Ala.Code § 7-2-105, at ¶ 1). The ARXX wall system cannot be deemed “goods,” movants maintain, because this product is not severable from the realty.”
Chedester v. Gebrueder Knauf Verwaltungsgesellschaft KG (S.D. Ala. 2023).
· cites it 6× “Official comments to § 7-2-105 provide, “This Article in including within its scope ‘things attached to realty’ adds the further test that they must be capable of severance without material harm thereto.”
Smith v. Crosrol, Inc., 498 F. Supp. 697 (M.D. Ala. 1980).
“” Goods include “specially manufactured goods” (§ 7-2-105) as well as “equipment if they are used or bought for use primarily in business” (§ 7-9-109).”
Wood v. Wilkinson, 425 So. 2d 1062 (Ala. 1982).
“” (emphasis added) In the present case the airplane was a good within the meaning of “goods” in Code 1975, § 7-2-105, and therefore the transaction should be covered by the provisions of article 2, of title 7, Code 1975, or more appropriately, the “Sales” article of the Uniform…”
— Ala. Code § 7-2-105(1) — 6 cases
Keck v. Dryvit Sys., Inc., 830 So. 2d 1 (Ala. 2002).
“Paragraph 1, Official Comment to § 7-2-105, Ala.Code 1975. Thus, in order to be considered a product within the meaning of the UCC, the EIFS must be capable of severance from the Kecks' home without causing material harm to the home.”
RMS Tech., Inc. v. TDY Indus., Inc., 64 F. App'x 853 (4th Cir. 2003).
“” Ala.Code Ann. § 7-2-105(1). It defines the sale of goods as “the passing of title from the seller to the buyer for a price.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.