Ark. Code Ann. § 4-2-709 (2026)
Action for the price
-
When the buyer fails to pay the price as it becomes due the seller may recover, together with any incidental damages under the next section the price
- of goods accepted or of conforming goods lost or damaged within a commercially reasonable time after risk of their loss has passed to the buyer; and
- of goods identified to the contract if the seller is unable after reasonable effort to resell them at a reasonable price or the circumstances reasonably indicate that such effort will be unavailing.
- Where the seller sues for the price he must hold for the buyer any goods which have been identified to the contract and are still in his control except that if resale becomes possible he may resell them at any time prior to the collection of the judgment. The net proceeds of any such resale must be credited to the buyer and payment of the judgment entitles him to any goods not resold.
- After the buyer has wrongfully rejected or revoked acceptance of the goods or has failed to make a payment due or has repudiated (§ 4-2-610), a seller who is held not entitled to the price under this section shall nevertheless be awarded damages for non-acceptance under the preceding section.
History. Acts 1961, No. 185, § 2-709; A.S.A. 1947, § 85-2-709.
Research References
ALR.
Applicability of UCC Article 2 to Mixed Contracts for Sale of Consumer Goods and Services. 1 A.L.R.7th Art. 3 (2015).
Applicability of UCC Article 2 to Mixed Contracts for Sale of Goods and Services: Distributorship, Franchise, and Similar Business Contracts. 8 A.L.R.7th Art. 4 (2015).
Applicability of UCC Article 2 to Mixed Contracts for Sale of Business Goods and Services: Manufacturing, Construction, and Similar Contracts. 15 A.L.R.7th Art. 7 (2015).
Ark. L. Rev.
Paulson, Survey of Arkansas Law: Business Law, 2 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 161.
Case Notes
Accepted Goods.
Where the buyer had ample opportunity to inspect the goods and at no time indicated that the goods would not be accepted, the goods were deemed to have been accepted under § 4-2-606(1)(b) and the seller was therefore entitled to recover the unpaid balance of the contract price under subsection (1)(a) of this section. Unlaub Co. v. Sexton, 568 F.2d 72 (8th Cir. 1977).
Where defendant had an opportunity to inspect the goods and the goods were accepted under § 4-2-606(1)(b), plaintiffs in breach of contract action were entitled to recover the unpaid balance of the contract price under provisions of subdivision (1)(a) of this section, and defendant's breach of the contract which triggered seller's remedy under § 4-2-703(a) included the right to recover damages for nonacceptance. Watson v. Miears, 612 F. Supp. 1235 (W.D. Ark. 1984), aff'd, 772 F.2d 433 (8th Cir. 1985).
In a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case, creditor did not convert the proceeds from the sale of two vacuum units when it credited the proceeds to an outstanding account, rather than forwarding the payment to debtor, and debtor should have pursued the case as a breach of contract because a sale was effectuated when an agreement was made since the units had already been delivered; creditor was entitled to exercise setoff under the circumstances, but was still liable for an amount that had not been credited or paid to debtor. Nat'l Hydro-Vac Indus. Servs., L.L.C. v. Fed. Signal Corp. (In re Nat'l Hydro-Vac Indus. Servs., L.L.C.), 314 B.R. 753 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2004).
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).