Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 672.714 (2025)

Buyer’s damages for breach in regard to accepted goods.

✓ 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

672.714 Buyer’s damages for breach in regard to accepted goods.—

(1) Where the buyer has accepted goods and given notification (s. 672.607(3)) he or she may recover as damages for any nonconformity of tender the loss resulting in the ordinary course of events from the seller’s breach as determined in any manner which is reasonable.

(2) The measure of damages for breach of warranty is the difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have had if they had been as warranted, unless special circumstances show proximate damages of a different amount.

(3) In a proper case any incidental and consequential damages under the next section may also be recovered.

History.—s. 1, ch. 65-254; s. 609, ch. 97-102.

Note.—s. 2-714, U.C.C.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 22 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: Armadillo Distrib. Enter., Inc. v. Hai Yun Musical Instruments Manufacture Co., 142 F. Supp. 3d 1245 (M.D. Fla. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Armadillo Distrib. Enter., Inc. v. Hai Yun Musical Instruments Manufacture Co., 142 F. Supp. 3d 1245 (M.D. Fla. 2015). · cites it 8× “Instead, Plaintiff only refers to relief under Fla. Stat. §§ 672.714 and 672.715. These statutes are not, mentioned in the Complaint, which cites only to Fla.”

Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc. v. Conley, 372 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). · cites it 6× “This constitutes notice under Section 2-714 of the Uniform Commercial Code [Section 672.714, Florida Statutes]. "10. Plaintiff's damages are properly measured by difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have…”

Smith v. Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co., 663 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (S.D. Fla. 2009). · cites it 2× “” Fla. Stat. § 672.714 . For the reasons discussed in the preceding section, the Court finds that Plaintiff satisfies this element.”

Parsons v. Motor Homes of Am., 465 So. 2d 1285 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). · cites it 3× “[7] § 672.714, Fla. Stat. (1981), provides: 672.”

Paul Gottlieb & Co. v. Alps South Corp., 985 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). · cites it 2× “See § 672.714-.715. Comment (a) of the Restatement of Contracts *9 (Second) section 347 echoes this sentiment in that expectation damages are intended to give the injured party "the benefit of his bargain by putting him in as good as a position as he would have been had the…”

Kia Motors Am., Inc. v. Khristopher Doughty & Katarzyna Dziewiecien, 242 So. 3d 1172 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018). · cites it 2× “See § 672.714(2), (3), Fla. Stat. (2014); Bill Branch Chevrolet, Inc.”

Halliburton Co. v. E. Cement Corp., 672 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). · cites it 3× “§§ 672.714 and 672.715, Fla.Stat. (1995); see also Hadley v.”

Bill Branch Chevrolet, Inc. v. Redmond, 378 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). · cites it 2× “Section 672.714(2), Fla. Stat. (1977). Additionally, appellee was entitled to incidental and consequential damages.”

ADAM METAL SUPPLY v. Electrodex, Inc., 386 So. 2d 1316 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). · cites it 6× “Consequently, under Section 672.714, Florida Statutes (1979), it was entitled to damages for the nonconforming shipment which it could subtract from the contract price of the shipment pursuant to Section 672.”

Frank Griffin Volkswagen, Inc. v. Smith, 610 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). “§§ 672.714-.715, Fla. Stat. (1987) (UCC §§ 2-714 to -715).”

Koplowitz v. Girard, 658 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). “3d DCA 1977); §§ 672.714(3), 672.715(2) Fla. Stat. (1993).”

Magnum Constr. Mgmt. Corp., Etc. v. City of Miami Beach, 209 So. 3d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “See §§ 672.714, 672.715, Fla. Stat. (2010); Miles v.”

Show all 22 citing cases →

— 672.714(2) — 9 cases

Kia Motors Am., Inc. v. Khristopher Doughty & Katarzyna Dziewiecien, 242 So. 3d 1172 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018). “See § 672.714(2), (3), Fla. Stat. (2014); Bill Branch Chevrolet, Inc.”

Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc. v. Conley, 372 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). “This constitutes notice under Section 2-714 of the Uniform Commercial Code [Section 672.714, Florida Statutes]. "10. Plaintiff's damages are properly measured by difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have…”

Bill Branch Chevrolet, Inc. v. Redmond, 378 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). “Section 672.714(2), Fla. Stat. (1977). Additionally, appellee was entitled to incidental and consequential damages.”

Halliburton Co. v. E. Cement Corp., 672 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). “§§ 672.714 and 672.715, Fla.Stat. (1995); see also Hadley v.”

Lawson v. Turner, 404 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

— 672.714(3) — 5 cases

Bill Branch Chevrolet, Inc. v. Redmond, 378 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). “Section 672.714(2), Fla. Stat. (1977). Additionally, appellee was entitled to incidental and consequential damages.”

Koplowitz v. Girard, 658 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). “3d DCA 1977); §§ 672.714(3), 672.715(2) Fla. Stat. (1993).”

Halliburton Co. v. E. Cement Corp., 672 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). “§§ 672.714 and 672.715, Fla.Stat. (1995); see also Hadley v.”

ADAM METAL SUPPLY v. Electrodex, Inc., 386 So. 2d 1316 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). “Consequently, under Section 672.714, Florida Statutes (1979), it was entitled to damages for the nonconforming shipment which it could subtract from the contract price of the shipment pursuant to Section 672.”

Bill Wallace Ford, Inc. v. Lamoureaux, 33 Fla. Supp. 2d 47 (Fla. Cty. Ct. 1988).

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.