California Codes

Cal. Commercial Code § 2102 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Unless the context otherwise requires, and except as provided in subdivision (c), this division applies to transactions in goods and, in the case of a hybrid transaction, it applies to the extent provided in subdivision (b).

(b)In a hybrid transaction:

(1)If the sale-of-goods aspects do not predominate, only the provisions of this division which relate primarily to the sale-of-goods aspects of the transaction apply, and the provisions that relate primarily to the transaction as a whole do not apply.

(2)If the sale-of-goods aspects predominate, this division applies to the transaction but does not preclude application in appropriate circumstances of other law to aspects of the transaction which do not relate to the sale of goods.

(c)This division does not:

(1)Apply to a transaction that, even though in the form of an unconditional contract to sell or present sale, operates only to create a security interest; or

(2)Impair or repeal a statute regulating sales to consumers, farmers, or other specified classes of buyers.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 27 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1971–2023 · leading case: In re Conagra Foods, Inc., 90 F. Supp. 3d 919 (C.D. Cal. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In re Conagra Foods, Inc., 90 F. Supp. 3d 919 (C.D. Cal. 2015). “” See Cal. Com. Code § 2102 ; see also ’ Cal. Civ.”

Keegan v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 838 F. Supp. 2d 929 (C.D. Cal. 2012). “” See Cal. Com.Code § 2102; see also Cal. Civ. Code § 1791.”

Ass'n Des Eleveurs v. Rob Bonta, 33 F.4th 1107 (9th Cir. 2022). “” Cal. Com. Code § 2102 . But the sales ban does not define “sale,” and the UCC definition cannot “impair or repeal” language that does not exist.”

Asghari v. Volkswagen Grp. of Am., Inc., 42 F. Supp. 3d 1306 (C.D. Cal. 2013). “” See Cal. Com. Code § 2102 ; see also Cal. Civ.”

Viggiano v. Hansen Nat. Corp., 944 F. Supp. 2d 877 (C.D. Cal. 2013). “” See Cal. Com. Code § 2102 ; see also Cal. Civ.”

Specht v. Netscape Commc'ns Corp., 150 F. Supp. 2d 585 (S.D.N.Y. 2001). “” See Cal. Com.Code § 2102. The parties’ relationship essentially is that of a seller and a purchaser of goods.”

T & M Solar & Air Conditioning, Inc. v. Lennox Int'l Inc., 83 F. Supp. 3d 855 (N.D. Cal. 2015). “” See Cal. Comm.Code § 2102; see also Cal. Civ.”

Tae Hee Lee v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., 992 F. Supp. 2d 962 (C.D. Cal. 2014). “” See Cal. Commercial Code § 2102 ; see also Cal.”

Gerwin v. Se. California Ass'n of Seventh Day Adventists, 8 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 643 (Cal. Ct. App. 1971). “(Com. Code, § 2102.) The code became operative on January 1, 1965.”

Simulados Software, Ltd. v. Photon Infotech Private, Ltd., 40 F. Supp. 3d 1191 (N.D. Cal. 2014). “Cal. Com. Code § 2102 . The UCC defines goods as “all things (including specially manufactured goods) which are movable at the time of identification to the contract for sale .”

Comerica Bank v. Whitehall Specialties, Inc., 352 F. Supp. 2d 1077 (C.D. Cal. 2004). “Cal. Com. Code § 2102 . In this case, the invoices concerned the sale of A & J Cheese’s cheese product through Whitehall to customers like Suprema.”

Sys. Unlimited, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., 228 F. App'x 854 (11th Cir. 2007). “” Cal. Com.Code § 2102; Fla. Stat. § 672.102 .”

Show all 27 citing cases →

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.