Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 672.609 (2025)
Right to adequate assurance of performance.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
672.609 Right to adequate assurance of performance.—
(1) A contract for sale imposes an obligation on each party that the other’s expectation of receiving due performance will not be impaired. When reasonable grounds for insecurity arise with respect to the performance of either party the other may in writing demand adequate assurance of due performance and until he or she receives such assurance may if commercially reasonable suspend any performance for which he or she has not already received the agreed return.
(2) Between merchants the reasonableness of grounds for insecurity and the adequacy of any assurance offered shall be determined according to commercial standards.
(3) Acceptance of any improper delivery or payment does not prejudice the aggrieved party’s right to demand adequate assurance of future performance.
(4) After receipt of a justified demand failure to provide within a reasonable time not exceeding 30 days such assurance of due performance as is adequate under the circumstances of the particular case is a repudiation of the contract.
Note.—s. 2-609, U.C.C.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case: Validsa, Inc. v. PDVSA Servs. Inc., 632 F. Supp. 2d 1219 (S.D. Fla. 2009).
Validsa, Inc. v. PDVSA Servs. Inc., 632 F. Supp. 2d 1219 (S.D. Fla. 2009). “See Fla. Stat. § 672.609 (1). Specifically, Section 672.”
Validsa, Inc. v. PDVSA Servs., Inc., 424 F. App'x 862 (11th Cir. 2011). “§ 672.609(1). Until the requesting party receives such adequate assurances, it “may if commercially reasonable suspend any performance for which [it] has not already received the agreed return.”
Future Tech Int'l, Inc. v. Tae Il Media, Ltd., 944 F. Supp. 1538 (S.D. Fla. 1996). “Due to this asserted failure to pay invoices, and in view of the Future Tech’s commencement of this lawsuit, Tae II Media deemed itself insecure as to Future Tech’s *1545 willingness to meet its contractual obligations, and exercised its rights under Fla. Stat. § 672.609 to…”
Cafaro v. Zois, 693 F. App'x 810 (11th Cir. 2017). “” Fla. Stat. § 672.609 ; see Hosp. Mortg. Grp.”
Exim Brickell LLC v. PDVSA Servs. Inc., 516 F. App'x 742 (11th Cir. 2013). “See Fla. Stat. § 672.609 . To recover, the party claiming repudiation must prove that it also was ready and willing to perform.”
In Re JW Aluminum Co., 200 B.R. 64 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1996). “The transaction between the parties is obviously governed by the Article of Sales of the UCC, particularly 2-609, as adopted in this State by section 672.609, Florida Statutes (1992) which provides: RIGHT TO ADEQUATE ASSURANCE OF PERFORMANCE (1) A contract for sale imposes an…”
FORD MOTOR CR. CO. v. Alachua Trading Co., Inc., 531 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). “Appellant contends that its security interest has been impaired so as to constitute a breach of the agreement under section 672.609, Florida Statutes. We find that appellant has not complied with the statutory procedure to obtain assurance of performance, and we therefore affirm…”
Carolina Consulting Corp. v. Ajax Paving Indus., Inc., 86 So. 3d 502 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). “§ 672.609(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). Once adequate assurance of performance is demanded, the other party to the transaction must provide adequate assurance within a reasonable time, not to exceed thirty days, or the contract is repudiated.”
Sellstate Realty Sys. Network, Inc. v. Black (M.D. Fla. 2021). “§ 672.609(1). If courts routinely construed demand letters as repudiations, however, a party's right to adequate assurance could be turned on its head, instead providing an adversary with a ready claim for anticipatory breach.”
Meraki Installers LLC v. New East Solar Energy (Am.) Inc, a California Corp. (N.D. Fla. 2025). “§ 672.609 . Alleging the breach of contract or promissory estoppel (in the 3 “Exhibits to the complaint are considered a part of the complaint for all purposes, Fed.”
— 672.609(1) — 3 cases
Validsa, Inc. v. PDVSA Servs. Inc., 632 F. Supp. 2d 1219 (S.D. Fla. 2009). “See Fla. Stat. § 672.609 (1). Specifically, Section 672.”
Carolina Consulting Corp. v. Ajax Paving Indus., Inc., 86 So. 3d 502 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). “§ 672.609(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). Once adequate assurance of performance is demanded, the other party to the transaction must provide adequate assurance within a reasonable time, not to exceed thirty days, or the contract is repudiated.”
Sellstate Realty Sys. Network, Inc. v. Black (M.D. Fla. 2021). “§ 672.609(1). If courts routinely construed demand letters as repudiations, however, a party's right to adequate assurance could be turned on its head, instead providing an adversary with a ready claim for anticipatory breach.”
— 672.609(4) — 2 cases
FORD MOTOR CR. CO. v. Alachua Trading Co., Inc., 531 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). “Appellant contends that its security interest has been impaired so as to constitute a breach of the agreement under section 672.609, Florida Statutes. We find that appellant has not complied with the statutory procedure to obtain assurance of performance, and we therefore affirm…”
Carolina Consulting Corp. v. Ajax Paving Indus., Inc., 86 So. 3d 502 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). “§ 672.609(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). Once adequate assurance of performance is demanded, the other party to the transaction must provide adequate assurance within a reasonable time, not to exceed thirty days, or the contract is repudiated.”
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.