The 2024 Florida Statutes
|
||||||
|
. . . . § 672.719(2); 810 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/2-719(2); Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 106, § 2-719; N.Y. U.C.C. . . .
. . . Stat. 672.719(1)(a), (3)). . . .
. . . . § 672.719(1); Ga. Code § 11-2-719(1); Idaho Code § 28-2-719(1); 810 ILCS 5/2-719(1); Ind. . . .
. . . . § 672.719 (“Consequential damages may be limited or excluded unless the limitation or exclusion is . . .
. . . . § 672.719 (“The agreement may provide for remedies ... in substitution for those provided in this chapter . . . Stat. § 672.719; Griffis v. . . . Mincom, Inc., 2007 WL 1222595 (M.D.Fla. 2007) (holding that § 672.316 and § 672.719 stand for the principle . . .
. . . See § 672.719, Fla. Stat. (1999); Metro. Dade County v. . . .
. . . See § 672.719; Council Bros., Inc. v. . . .
. . . Jet Sales argues that a remedy is optional under Florida Statutes Section 672.719(1)(b) unless the Agreement . . . Section 672.719(1)(b) states, “Resort to a remedy as provided is optional unless the remedy is expressly . . .
. . . . § 672.719(l)(a). . . . Ann. § 672.719(2). . . .
. . . . §§ 672.316(4), 672.719(3); see also Action Orthopedics, Inc. v. . . . See Fla.Stat. 672.719. . . . See Fla.Stat. § 672.719(2). . . . See Fla.Stat. § 672.719 Official Comment (“[I]f the parties intend for a written warranty to prescribe . . .
. . . See §§ 672.719(2), (3),-Fla. Stat. (1995); James J. White and Robert S. . . .
. . . Buyer invoked section 672.719(2), Florida Statutes (1975), in the Florida Uniform Commercial Code. . . .
. . . Section 672.719, Florida Statutes, authorizes the parties to a contract to provide for remedies in addition . . . As stated in Section 672.719(2), Florida Statutes (1987) (UCC § 2-719(2)): “Where circumstances cause . . . And section 672.719(2) (UCC § 2-719(2)) provides that "[w]here circumstances cause an exclusive or limited . . .
. . . . §§ 672.718, 672.719, Fla.Stat. (1986); Lafayette Stabilizer Repair, Inc. v. . . .
. . . erred in ruling the warranty notice provision was a limitation of remedy provision pursuant to Section 672.719 . . . the trial court’s ruling that the warranty notice provision was a limitation of remedy under Section 672.719 . . . The court found the provisions of Section 672.719, Florida Statutes (here reproduced at fn. 5) applicable . . . Aucilla River Naval Stores Co., 103 Fla. 605, 137 So. 886 (1931). . § 672.719, Fla.Stat. (1981), provides . . . : 672.719 Contractual modification or limitation of remedy.— (1) Subject to the provisions of subsections . . .
. . . property, and the clause seeking to limit liability should have been enforced as permitted by section 672.719 . . . prima facie unconscionable and should have been given effect absent a showing of unconscionability. § 672.719 . . .
. . . Section 672.719, Florida Statutes (1981) allows contractual agreements to provide for limitations of . . . Section 672.719(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1981). . . .
. . . We reject Pennington’s theory based on Sections 672.316 and 672.719, that the “warranty” printed on each . . . Similarly, we would agree with Pennington that Section 672.719(l)(b) permits a limitation of damages . . .
. . . .-316(4) and 672.719, Fla.Stat. (1977). Such agreements are enforceable. . . .
. . . Absent a finding of unconscionability, the grower may still find relief in Section 672.719(2), Florida . . .
. . . Section 672.719(2), Florida Statutes (1975) (Section 2-719[2] of the UCC). . . . Section 672.719(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1975). . . . Section 672.719(2), Florida Statutes (1975). . . .
. . . provided for a remedy agreed to by the parties, thus, plaintiff was foreclosed from rescission under § 672.719 . . .