Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 672.716 (2025)
Buyer’s right to specific performance or replevin.
✓ 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
672.716 Buyer’s right to specific performance or replevin.—
(1) Specific performance may be decreed where the goods are unique or in other proper circumstances.
(2) The decree for specific performance may include such terms and conditions as to payment of the price, damages, or other relief as the court may deem just.
(3) The buyer has a right of replevin for goods identified to the contract if after reasonable effort she or he is unable to effect cover for such goods or the circumstances reasonably indicate that such effort will be unavailing or if the goods have been shipped under reservation and satisfaction of the security interest in them has been made or tendered. In the case of goods bought for personal, family, or household purposes, the buyer’s right of replevin vests upon acquisition of a special property, even if the seller had not then repudiated or failed to deliver.
Note.—s. 2-716, U.C.C.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1985–2023 · leading case: Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc., 645 F.3d 1254 (11th Cir. 2011).
Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc., 645 F.3d 1254 (11th Cir. 2011). “See Fla. Stat. § 672.716 (1) (adopting the Uniform Commercial Code position that “[sjpecific performance may be decreed where the goods are unique or in other proper circumstances”); George Vining & Sons, Inc.”
DePrince v. Starboard Cruise Servs., Inc., 163 So. 3d 586 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015). “111 , 111 (1905)); see also § 672.716(1), Fla. Stat. (2013) (“Specific performance may be decreed where the goods are unique or in other proper circumstances.”
Parsons v. Motor Homes of Am., 465 So. 2d 1285 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). “713; (3) specific performance or replevin Section 672.716; (4) rejection Section 672.”
Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc., 526 F. Supp. 2d 1236 (M.D. Fla. 2007). “” § 672.716(1), Fla. Stat. Specific performance should only be granted when: “1) the plaintiff is clearly entitled to it, 2) there is no adequate remedy at law, and 3) the judge believes that justice requires it.”
T & T Air Charter, Inc. v. Duncan Aircraft Sales, 566 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). “Section 672.716(3) reads: The buyer has a right of replevin for goods identified to the contract if after reasonable effort he is unable to effect cover for such goods or the circumstances reasonably indicate that such effort will be unavailing or if the goods have been shipped…”
Joseph S. Dimauro, Derivatively & as a Member of 784 Lake Rogers, LLC v. Michael W. Martin & Claudia a. Kiwi (Fla. 4th DCA 2023). “1st DCA 1958); § 672.716(1), Fla. Stat. (2020). Here, the operating agreement does not limit the parties’ remedies.”
Alan Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc. (11th Cir. 2011). “This risk is particularly acute in a case like this one, in which the equitable claim is so lacking in merit: the jet in question is not a unique good and Horowitch therefore cannot obtain specific performance to force its sale.”
— 672.716(1) — 3 cases
DePrince v. Starboard Cruise Servs., Inc., 163 So. 3d 586 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015). “111 , 111 (1905)); see also § 672.716(1), Fla. Stat. (2013) (“Specific performance may be decreed where the goods are unique or in other proper circumstances.”
Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc., 526 F. Supp. 2d 1236 (M.D. Fla. 2007). “” § 672.716(1), Fla. Stat. Specific performance should only be granted when: “1) the plaintiff is clearly entitled to it, 2) there is no adequate remedy at law, and 3) the judge believes that justice requires it.”
Joseph S. Dimauro, Derivatively & as a Member of 784 Lake Rogers, LLC v. Michael W. Martin & Claudia a. Kiwi (Fla. 4th DCA 2023). “1st DCA 1958); § 672.716(1), Fla. Stat. (2020). Here, the operating agreement does not limit the parties’ remedies.”
— 672.716(3) — 1 case
T & T Air Charter, Inc. v. Duncan Aircraft Sales, 566 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). “Section 672.716(3) reads: The buyer has a right of replevin for goods identified to the contract if after reasonable effort he is unable to effect cover for such goods or the circumstances reasonably indicate that such effort will be unavailing or if the goods have been shipped…”
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.