672.104

Definitions: “merchant”; “between merchants”; “financing agency.”

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

672.104 Definitions: “merchant”; “between merchants”; “financing agency.”—

(1) “Merchant” means a person who deals in goods of the kind or otherwise by occupation holds himself or herself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the practices or goods involved in the transaction or to whom such knowledge or skill may be attributed by his or her employment of an agent or broker or other intermediary who by occupation holds himself or herself out as having such knowledge or skill.

(2) “Financing agency” means a bank, finance company or other person who in the ordinary course of business makes advances against goods or documents of title or who by arrangement with either the seller or the buyer intervenes in ordinary course to make or collect payment due or claimed under the contract for sale, as by purchasing or paying the seller’s draft or making advances against it or by merely taking it for collection whether or not documents of title accompany or are associated with the draft. “Financing agency” includes also a bank or other person who similarly intervenes between persons who are in the position of seller and buyer in respect to the goods (s. 672.707).

(3) “Between merchants” means in any transaction with respect to which both parties are chargeable with the knowledge or skill of merchants.

History.—s. 1, ch. 65-254; s. 556, ch. 97-102; s. 6, ch. 2010-131.

Note.—s. 2-104, U.C.C.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: RA Jones & Sons, Inc. v. Holman

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

RA Jones & Sons, Inc. v. Holman (1985) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “Jones contends that in this case, this question was one for the jury to determine. We agree. The long-standing caveat which controls here is that: "[T]he court should never direct a verdict for one party unless the evidence is such that no view which the jury may lawfully take…”

Validsa, Inc. v. PDVSA Services Inc. (2009) flsd · cites it 4× “See Fla. Stat. § 672.104 (1) (defining "merchant” as a "a person who deals in goods of the kind”); Fla.”

IBP, Inc. v. Hady Enterprises, Inc. (2002) flnd · cites it 2× “§ 672.104(1) (West Supp. 2002). A transaction "between merchants” is defined as "any transaction with respect to which both parties are chargeable with the knowledge or skill of merchants.”

Eastern Cement v. Halliburton Co. (1992) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “314, Florida Statutes (1989), if the seller is a "merchant," which it clearly is sub judice, see section 672.104(1), Florida Statutes (1989), an implied warranty that the goods are fit for the particular purposes of use and are merchantable, arises.”

General Tool Industries, Inc. v. Premier Machinery, Inc. (2001) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “See § 672.104, Fla. Stat. (2000). The provisions of the UCC recognize that in transactions involving the sale of goods between merchants, there is often an exchange of forms between the merchants and that these forms create the contract between the parties.”

Czarnecki v. Roller (1989) flsd “, provides in pertinent part: Unless excluded or modified, a warranty that the goods shall be merchantable is implied in a contract for their sale if the seller is a merchant with respect to the goods of that kind____ *843 Section 672.104(1), Fla.Stat., defines a “merchant” as:…”

Ashley Square, Ltd. v. Contractors Supply of Orlando, Inc. (1988) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “Section 672.104(1) defines "merchant" as: (1) "Merchant" means a person who deals in goods of the kind or otherwise by his occupation holds himself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the practices or goods involved in the transaction or to whom such knowledge or skill…”

Lonnie D. Adams Building Contractor, Inc. v. O'Connor (1998) fladistctapp “In this regard we note that the implied warranties in the Uniform Commercial Code do not generally pass from a contractor to an owner, because a contractor is viewed as a provider of services, not a merchant.”

Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Squires Development (1980) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “See Section 672.104(1), Florida Statutes (1977).”

United Food Mart, Inc. v. Motiva Enterprises, LLC (2005) flsd · cites it 2× “" ‘Merchant’ means a person who deals in goods of the kind ____" Fla. Stat. § 672.104 (1). As a motor fuel supplier, Moti-va qualifies as a “merchant” of motor fuel for purposes of the U.”

MERAKI INSTALLERS LLC v. NEW EAST SOLAR ENERGY (AMERICA) INC, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION (2025) flnd · cites it 4× “Fla. Stat. § 672.104 (definition of “merchant”).”

Med-Stop, Inc. v. Vandutch, Inc. (2025) flsd · cites it 3× “§ 672.104. See Complaint ¶ 24 (“Moreover, operating as a yacht broker in Florida, [VDI] owed a fiduciary duty to their buyer, Med-Stop[.”

Show all 15 citing cases →

— 672.104(1) — 8 cases

RA Jones & Sons, Inc. v. Holman (1985) fladistctapp “Jones contends that in this case, this question was one for the jury to determine. We agree. The long-standing caveat which controls here is that: "[T]he court should never direct a verdict for one party unless the evidence is such that no view which the jury may lawfully take…”

Eastern Cement v. Halliburton Co. (1992) fladistctapp “314, Florida Statutes (1989), if the seller is a "merchant," which it clearly is sub judice, see section 672.104(1), Florida Statutes (1989), an implied warranty that the goods are fit for the particular purposes of use and are merchantable, arises.”

IBP, Inc. v. Hady Enterprises, Inc. (2002) flnd “§ 672.104(1) (West Supp. 2002). A transaction "between merchants” is defined as "any transaction with respect to which both parties are chargeable with the knowledge or skill of merchants.”

Ashley Square, Ltd. v. Contractors Supply of Orlando, Inc. (1988) fladistctapp “Section 672.104(1) defines "merchant" as: (1) "Merchant" means a person who deals in goods of the kind or otherwise by his occupation holds himself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the practices or goods involved in the transaction or to whom such knowledge or skill…”

— 672.104(3) — 1 case

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.