672.602
Manner and effect of rightful rejection.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
672.602 Manner and effect of rightful rejection.—
(1) Rejection of goods must be within a reasonable time after their delivery or tender. It is ineffective unless the buyer seasonably notifies the seller.
(2) Subject to the provisions of the two following sections on rejected goods (ss. 672.603 and 672.604):
(a) After rejection any exercise of ownership by the buyer with respect to any commercial unit is wrongful as against the seller; and
(b) If the buyer has before rejection taken physical possession of goods in which he or she does not have a security interest under the provisions of this chapter (s. 672.711(3)), the buyer is under a duty after rejection to hold them with reasonable care at the seller’s disposition for a time sufficient to permit the seller to remove them; but
(c) The buyer has no further obligations with regard to goods rightfully rejected.
(3) The seller’s rights with respect to goods wrongfully rejected are governed by the provisions of this chapter on seller’s remedies in general (s. 672.703).
History.—s. 1, ch. 65-254; s. 587, ch. 97-102.
Note.—s. 2-602, U.C.C.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case: Validsa, Inc. v. PDVSA Services Inc.
Validsa, Inc. v. PDVSA Services Inc. (2009)
“” Goods are considered accepted where the buyer, after having a reasonable opportunity to inspect the goods, fails to make an effective rejection of the goods as required under Fla. Stat. § 672.602 (1). See Fla. Stat. § 672.”
US Fid. & Guar. Co. v. N. Am. Steel Corp. (1976)
“606 What constitutes acceptance of goods (1) Acceptance of goods occurs when the buyer: * * * * * * (b) Fails to make an effective rejection (§ 672.602(1)), but such acceptance does not occur until the buyer has had a reasonable opportunity to inspect them; or .”
TWIN RIVERS ENGINEERING, INC. v. PACER USA, LLC (2018)
“§ 672.602(1), Fla. Stat. (2016) (“Rejection of goods must be within a reasonable time after their delivery or tender.”
Euroworld of California, Inc. v. Blakey (1985)
“Accordingly, Blakey’s delivery of two zero-time engines to Euroworld, compounded by the nine-month delay before notifying Euro-world of any problems with the engines, signified that Blakey accepted the engines and would fulfill his obligations pursuant to the agreement.”
In Re Holistic Services Corp. (1983)
“A rejection of goods under Section 672.602 must be made within a reasonable time and is ineffective unless the buyer notifies the seller, seasonably.”
Matter of East Coast Brokers and Packers, Inc. (1990)
“WHETHER DEBTOR PROPERLY REJECTED GOODS Fla.Stat. § 672.602 requires a rejection of goods must be within a “reasonable” time after their delivery and the buyer must “seasonably” notify the seller of the rejection.”
Zeflon LLC v. World Reach Health, LLC (2025)
“§ 672.602(1). Whether World Reach’s rejection—more than a month after Zeflon made its last shipment on the order—was timely is up for debate.”
Kosen v. Curtis Field, Inc. (1986)
“” § 672.602(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1985). In this case, the furniture was at all times available for Defendant to remove it from the condominium.”
— 672.602(1) — 3 cases
US Fid. & Guar. Co. v. N. Am. Steel Corp. (1976)
“606 What constitutes acceptance of goods (1) Acceptance of goods occurs when the buyer: * * * * * * (b) Fails to make an effective rejection (§ 672.602(1)), but such acceptance does not occur until the buyer has had a reasonable opportunity to inspect them; or .”
TWIN RIVERS ENGINEERING, INC. v. PACER USA, LLC (2018)
“§ 672.602(1), Fla. Stat. (2016) (“Rejection of goods must be within a reasonable time after their delivery or tender.”
Zeflon LLC v. World Reach Health, LLC (2025)
“§ 672.602(1). Whether World Reach’s rejection—more than a month after Zeflon made its last shipment on the order—was timely is up for debate.”
— 672.602(2)(b) — 1 case
Kosen v. Curtis Field, Inc. (1986)
“” § 672.602(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1985). In this case, the furniture was at all times available for Defendant to remove it from the condominium.”
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.