Florida Statute 672.302 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIX
COMMERCIAL RELATIONS

Chapter 672
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE: SALES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 672.302

672.302 Unconscionable contract or clause.—

(1) If the court as a matter of law finds the contract or any clause of the contract to have been unconscionable at the time it was made the court may refuse to enforce the contract, or it may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or it may so limit the application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result.

(2) When it is claimed or appears to the court that the contract or any clause thereof may be unconscionable the parties shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present evidence as to its commercial setting, purpose and effect to aid the court in making the determination.

History.—s. 1, ch. 65-254.

Note.—s. 2-302, U.C.C.

F.S. 672.302 on Google Scholar

F.S. 672.302 on CourtListener

Amendments to 672.302

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 672.302

Total Results: 15

Fleeman v. Case

342 So. 2d 815

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 22, 1976 | Docket: 421525

Cited 44 times | Published

future contracts or leases. [6] See, for example, § 672.302, Fla. Stat.: "Unconscionable contract or clause

Steinhardt v. Rudolph

422 So. 2d 884

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 17, 1982 | Docket: 1739863

Cited 33 times | Published

(Second) of Contracts § 208 (1979); see also § 672.302, Fla. Stat. (1981). At common law, an unconscionable

Bennett v. Behring Corp.

466 F. Supp. 689, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14404

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 15, 1979 | Docket: 2261720

Cited 25 times | Published

quote, reference was made by the Court to Florida Statute 672.302, a provision of the Uniform Commercial

Sellers v. Frank Griffin AMC Jeep, Inc.

526 So. 2d 147, 1988 WL 50148

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 17, 1988 | Docket: 2180729

Cited 21 times | Published

found in section 672.302. The trial court distinguished Capital Associates because section 672.302 is not

Fotomat Corp. of Fla. v. Chanda

464 So. 2d 626, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 525

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 1985 | Docket: 1661170

Cited 17 times | Published

unconscionable at the time it was made. See section 672.302, Florida Statutes (1981). At the conclusion

Garrett v. Janiewski

480 So. 2d 1324, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2223

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 25, 1985 | Docket: 2052579

Cited 13 times | Published

C. section 2-302 is codified in Florida as section 672.302.

Holt v. O'Brien Imports of Fort Myers, Inc.

862 So. 2d 87, 2003 WL 22681423

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 14, 2003 | Docket: 1762581

Cited 11 times | Published

court decide certain gateway issues and under section 672.302, Florida Statutes (2000), to have the court

Presidential Leasing, Inc. v. Krout

896 So. 2d 938, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 2694, 2005 WL 497152

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 2005 | Docket: 1282976

Cited 9 times | Published

court decide certain gateway issues and under section 672.302, Florida Statutes (2000), to have the court

Credit Alliance Corp. v. WESTLAND MACHINE COMPANY

439 So. 2d 332

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 29, 1983 | Docket: 1264734

Cited 8 times | Published

strike Westland's jury demand. Relying on section 672.302, Florida Statutes (1981), Westland argues that

FOOD ASSOCIATES INC. v. Capital Associates, Inc.

491 So. 2d 345, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1611

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 23, 1986 | Docket: 1383918

Cited 4 times | Published

1984). In that case we specifically found section 672.302(2), Florida Statutes (1983), to apply to leases

Mobile America Corporation v. Howard

307 So. 2d 507, 16 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 625

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 1975 | Docket: 1335382

Cited 4 times | Published

Although not cited by the trial judge in his order, § 672.302, F.S. 1971, adopting provision 2-302 of the Uniform

Capital Associates, Inc. v. Hudgens

455 So. 2d 651, 39 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 66

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 15, 1984 | Docket: 1317087

Cited 3 times | Published

commercial setting, purpose and effect... ." § 672.302(2), Fla. Stat. (1983). The contract between Capital

Varner v. BL Lanier Fruit Co., Inc.

370 So. 2d 61, 26 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 716, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14418

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 20, 1979 | Docket: 1386808

Cited 3 times | Published

on unconscionable contracts or clauses is Section 672.302(1), Florida Statutes (1975), which states:

In re Tousa, Inc.

503 B.R. 499, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 285, 2014 WL 210453, 2014 Bankr. LEXIS 192, 58 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 281

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | Filed: Jan 16, 2014 | Docket: 65785831

Published

unconscionability under UCC § 2-302, Fla. Stat. § 672.302 requires the existence of two conditions precedent

Colony Beach & Tennis Club Ass'n v. Colony Beach & Tennis Club, Inc. (In Re Colony Beach & Tennis Club Ass'n)

423 B.R. 690, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 297, 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 148, 2010 WL 286615

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 2010 | Docket: 1638474

Published

Contracts § 208 (1979)); see also Fla. Stat. § 672.302(1) (2008). The Florida Supreme Court has also