As used in this subchapter, unless the context requires otherwise:
(1) “Construction,” “farm,” “industrial” and “outdoor power,” when used to refer to tractors, implements, attachments or repair parts, have the meanings commonly used and understood among dealers and suppliers of those trades.
(2) “Contract agreement” means a written or oral contract or agreement between a dealer and a supplier by which the dealer is granted the right to sell their equipment and the dealer is required to order and maintain an inventory in excess of $25,000 at current net price from the supplier.
(3) “Current net price” means the price listed in the supplier’s price list in effect at the time the contract agreement is terminated, less any applicable discount allowed.
(4) “Dealer” means a person, firm or corporation engaged in the business of selling, at retail, construction, farm, industrial or outdoor power equipment and who maintains a total inventory of new equipment and repair parts valued at $50,000 or over and provides repair service for the above-mentioned equipment.
(5) “Inventory” means the tractors, implements, attachments, equipment and repair parts that the dealer purchased from the supplier.
(6) “Net cost” means the price the dealer paid the supplier for the inventory, less all applicable discounts allowed, plus the amount the dealer paid for freight costs from the supplier’s location to the dealer’s location, plus reasonable cost of assembly performed by the dealer.
(7) “Supplier” means a wholesaler, manufacturer or distributor who enters into a contract agreement with a dealer.
(8) “Termination” of a contract agreement means the termination, cancellation, nonrenewal or noncontinuation of the agreement.
66 Del. Laws, c. 173,
§
1;
Notes of Decisions
S. Track & Pump, Inc. v. Terex Corp., 852 F. Supp. 2d 456 (D. Del. 2012).
· cites it 2× “49) Count I seeks a declaration that the Delaware Dealer Statute, 6 Del. C. §§ 2720 et seq. (“Dealer Statute”), applies to the parties’ Distributorship Agreement.”
S. Track & Pump, Inc. v. Terex Corp., 722 F. Supp. 2d 509 (D. Del. 2010).
“brought this action on July 23, 2008, in the Superior Court of Delaware, seeking a declaratory judgment that Defendant Terex Corporation was required to repurchase certain inventory it had sold to Plaintiff and alleging claims for violation of 6 Del. C. § 2720 et seq. and breach…”
S. Track & Pump, Inc. v. Terex Corp., 623 F. Supp. 2d 558 (D. Del. 2009).
· cites it 2× “brought this action on July 23, 2008, in the Superior Court of Delaware, seeking a declaratory judgment that Defendant Terex Corporation was required to repurchase certain inventory it had sold to Plaintiff and alleging claims for violation of 6 Del. C. § 2720 et seq. and breach…”
S. Track & Pump, Inc. v. Terex Corp., 618 F. App'x 99 (3rd Cir. 2015).
“Because this appeal raised an important and unsettled issue concerning the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”), we asked the Delaware Supreme Court to accept certification under Delaware Supreme Court…”
Terex Corp. (Del. 2015).
· cites it 4× “A dispute pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) turns on the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”).”
Terex Corp. (Del. 2015).
· cites it 4× “A dispute pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) turns on the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”).”
— 6 Del. C. § 2720(2) — 2 cases
Terex Corp. (Del. 2015).
“A dispute pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) turns on the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”).”
Terex Corp. (Del. 2015).
“A dispute pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) turns on the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”).”
— 6 Del. C. § 2720(3) — 2 cases
Terex Corp. (Del. 2015).
“A dispute pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) turns on the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”).”
Terex Corp. (Del. 2015).
“A dispute pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) turns on the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”).”
— 6 Del. C. § 2720(5) — 2 cases
Terex Corp. (Del. 2015).
“A dispute pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) turns on the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”).”
Terex Corp. (Del. 2015).
“A dispute pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) turns on the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”).”
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.