Ark. Code Ann. » Title 4 Chapter 02
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 4-2-706 (2026)

Seller's resale including contract for resale

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. Under the conditions stated in § 4-2-703 on seller's remedies, the seller may resell the goods concerned or the undelivered balance thereof. Where the resale is made in good faith and in a commercially reasonable manner the seller may recover the difference between the resale price and the contract price together with any incidental damages allowed under the provisions of this chapter (§ 4-2-710), but less expenses saved in consequence of the buyer's breach.
  2. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3) or unless otherwise agreed resale may be at a public or private sale including sale by way of one (1) or more contracts to sell or of identification to an existing contract of the seller. Sale may be as a unit or in parcels and at any time and place and on any terms but every aspect of the sale including the method, manner, time, place and terms must be commercially reasonable. The resale must be reasonably identified as referring to the broken contract, but it is not necessary that the goods be in existence or that any or all of them have been identified to the contract before the breach.
  3. Where the resale is at private sale the seller must give the buyer reasonable notification of his intention to resell.
  4. Where the resale is at public sale
    1. only identified goods can be sold except where there is a recognized market for a public sale of futures in goods of the kind; and
    2. it must be made at a usual place or market for public sale if one is reasonably available and except in the case of goods which are perishable or threaten to decline in value speedily the seller must give the buyer reasonable notice of the time and place of the resale; and
    3. if the goods are not to be within the view of those attending the sale the notification of sale must state the place where the goods are located and provide for their reasonable inspection by prospective bidders; and
    4. the seller may buy.
  5. A purchaser who buys in good faith at a resale takes the goods free of any rights of the original buyer even though the seller fails to comply with one (1) or more of the requirements of this section.
  6. The seller is not accountable to the buyer for any profit made on any resale. A person in the position of a seller (§ 4-2-707) or a buyer who has rightfully rejected or justifiably revoked acceptance must account for any excess over the amount of his security interest, as hereinafter defined (§ 4-2-711(3)).

History. Acts 1961, No. 185, § 2-706; A.S.A. 1947, § 85-2-706.

Research References

ALR.

Resale of goods under UCC § 2-706. 101 A.L.R.5th 563.

U. Ark. Little Rock L.J.

White, The Decline of the Contract Market Damage Model, 11 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 1.

Case Notes

Commercial Reasonableness.

Where seller alleged in its complaint that it had made reasonable efforts to resell the bulldozer and where buyer in his motion for directed verdict stated that the resale was not commercially reasonable, the issue of commercial reasonableness of the resale was sufficiently raised at trial for determination of the issue on appeal. McMillan v. Meuser Material & Equip. Co., 260 Ark. 422, 541 S.W.2d 911 (1976).

Where, following buyer's alleged breach of contract for sale of a bulldozer, seller made no effort to resell the equipment for in excess of 14 months, the delay was commercially unreasonable. McMillan v. Meuser Material & Equip. Co., 260 Ark. 422, 541 S.W.2d 911 (1976).

Complaint.

Where seller, whose original complaint had sought recovery for the full purchase price and had alleged unsuccessful efforts to resell, was permitted to amend his complaint on the day before trial to the effect that the equipment was sold and seller sought damages, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in absence of proof that buyer's rights were materially prejudiced. McMillan v. Meuser Material & Equip. Co., 260 Ark. 422, 541 S.W.2d 911 (1976).

Damages.

Where, based on the evidence, the buyer had received notice of seller's intention to resell the equipment and thus the measure of damages provided in this section was applicable. McMillan v. Meuser Material & Equip. Co., 260 Ark. 422, 541 S.W.2d 911 (1976).

Trial court did not err holding that a buyer was entitled to the return of $15,454 in a breach of contract action against a shaving mill seller; because the seller spent $10,406 in additional expenses to make the machine salable to another purchaser after the buyer declined to purchase it, that amount was properly subtracted from the buyer's $25,860 down payment pursuant to subdivision (1) of this section. Bowen v. Gardner, 2013 Ark. App. 52, 425 S.W.3d 875 (2013).

Notice.

The purchaser was entitled to a reasonable notice of the seller's intention to resell a television placed in layaway upon a down payment with conflicting evidence as to when the purchaser was to take delivery of the set and where, long after the time when the seller testified delivery was to be taken, the purchaser informed the seller he was not yet ready for delivery and was assured by the seller that the set was in storage. Wood v. Downing, 243 Ark. 120, 418 S.W.2d 800 (1967).

Cited: Wawak v. Stewart, 247 Ark. 1093, 449 S.W.2d 922 (1970).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1989–2013 · leading case: Bowen v. Gardner, 425 S.W.3d 875 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bowen v. Gardner, 425 S.W.3d 875 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 5× “ceptance of goods or fails to make a payment due on or before delivery or repudiates with respect to a part or the whole, then with respect to any goods directly affected and, if the breach is of the whole contract (§ 4-2-612), then also with respect to the whole undelivered…”
Microsize, Inc. v. Arkansas Microfilm, Inc., 780 S.W.2d 574 (Ark. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “on 4-2-711(3) provides that: On rightful rejection or justifiable revocation of acceptance a buyer has a security interest in goods in his possession or control for any payments made on their price and any expenses reasonably incurred in their inspection, receipt,…”
Roop v. Cook, 334 S.W.3d 412 (Ark. Ct. App. 2009). “The Roops base their argument on certain provisions of the UCC, specifically Arkansas Code Annotated sections 4-2-706 (remedies for the seller of goods after default by the buyer under the contract for the sale of those goods) and 4-2-711 (remedies for the buyer of goods…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 4-2-706(1) — 1 case
Bowen v. Gardner, 425 S.W.3d 875 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013). “ceptance of goods or fails to make a payment due on or before delivery or repudiates with respect to a part or the whole, then with respect to any goods directly affected and, if the breach is of the whole contract (§ 4-2-612), then also with respect to the whole undelivered…”
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.