O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 11-2-703 (2019)

Seller’s remedies in general

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Where the buyer wrongfully rejects or revokes acceptance of goods or fails to make a payment due on or before delivery or repudiates with respect to a part or the whole, then with respect to any goods directly affected and, if the breach is of the whole contract (Code Section 11-2-612), then also with respect to the whole undelivered balance, the aggrieved seller may:

(a) Withhold delivery of such goods;

(b) Stop delivery by any bailee as hereafter provided (Code Section 11-2-705);

(d) Resell and recover damages as hereafter provided (Code Section 11-2-706);

(e) Recover damages for nonacceptance (Code Section 11-2-708) or in a proper case the price (Code Section 11-2-709);

(f) Cancel.

History

Code 1933, § 109A-2-703, enacted by Ga. L. 1962, p. 156, § 1.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, §§ 96-107 and 96-113 are included in the annotations for this Code section. Action for price as remedy for wrongful rejection. - O.C.G.A. § 11-2602 recognizes that wrongful rejections may occur and refers to O.C.G.A. § 11-2703 for seller’s remedies in such event, one of which is an action for the price. Cochran v. Horner, 121 Ga. App. 297, 173 S.E.2d 448, 1970 Ga. App. LEXIS 1204 (1970); Lipsey Motors v. Karp Motors, Inc., 194 Ga. App. 15, 389 S.E.2d 537, 1989 Ga. App. LEXIS 1712 (1989). Nondelivery as defense. - Defendant, maker of note, having breached contract by refusing to accept goods purchased thereunder, the contract by its terms not subject to cancellation, and vendor having elected to store goods for vendee, and having notified vendee of disposition of the goods, defendant cannot set up as a defense to suit on the note that merchandise was not delivered to vendee according to contract terms. Carnation v. Pridgen, 84 Ga. App. 768, 67 S.E.2d 485,

1951 Ga. App. LEXIS 790 (1951) (decided under former Code 1933, § 96-107). Proving that measure of damages is incorrect. - In suit brought by vendor on contract for sale of grapevines where the buyer refused to accept the vines, measure of damages, and often amount of damages, will vary with plaintiff’s election, and defendant has right to deny this and prove that measure of damages sued for is not correct under the evidence. Hester v. Love, 84 Ga. App. 765, 67 S.E.2d 481, 1951 Ga. App. LEXIS 789 (1951) (decided under former Code 1933, § 96113). Failure to make payment. - In a suit involving an oral contract to sell a horse, it was error to grant summary judgment to the seller; there was a factual dispute as to whether the parties agreed on a deadline for payment and thus as to whether the seller was entitled to cancel the contract under O.C.G.A. § 11-2-703 when the buyer did not send a payment until after the alleged deadline expired. Rowland v. Scarborough Farms, LLC, 285 Ga. App. 831, 648 S.E.2d 151, 2007 Ga. App. LEXIS 651 (2007).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 13 Am. Jur. 2d, Carriers, § 438 et seq. 67A Am. Jur. 2d, Sales, §§ 986-1163. Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms. 6 Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Commercial Code, § 2:653. C.J.S. 77A C.J.S., Sales, § 326. U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 2703. ALR. Remedy of contractor, who has partially performed before discovering fraud, as to character or amount of work, 2 A.L.R. 1396. Right of seller to rescind or refuse further deliveries upon the buyer’s failure to pay for instalments, 14 A.L.R. 1209; 75 A.L.R. 609. Right of seller to ship goods after notice of repudiation by buyer, 27 A.L.R. 1230. Expense of caring for personal property prior to its resale upon failure of sale contract, 29 A.L.R. 61. Liability of labor organization for inducing breach of contract to furnish or accept material, 29 A.L.R. 562. Rights of parties to a timber contract upon failure of purchaser to remove timber within time fixed or within a reasonable time, 31 A.L.R. 944; 42 A.L.R. 641; 71 A.L.R. 143; 164 A.L.R. 423. Anticipatory repudiation of contract for sale of goods by buyer as affecting time as of which damages are to be computed, 34 A.L.R. 114. Measure of damages for buyer’s repudiation of or failure to accept goods under

executory contract, 44 A.L.R. 215; 108 A.L.R. 1482. Rights and remedies upon cancelation of sales agency, 52 A.L.R. 546; 89 A.L.R. 252. Bringing action for price as waiver by conditional vendor of right to reclaim property, 56 A.L.R. 238; 113 A.L.R. 653. Rights and remedies as between parties to a conditional sale after the seller has repossessed himself of the property, 83 A.L.R. 959; 99 A.L.R. 1288; 49 A.L.R.2d 15. Guaranty as covering buyer’s liability for goods which he refused to accept, 94 A.L.R. 548. Performance by vendor of covenant to make improvement as condition of his right to recover purchase price or instalment thereof, 104 A.L.R. 1062. Return of chattel to seller after delivery to buyer as revival of seller’s lien; and its effect upon conditions of enforcing lien, 118 A.L.R. 564. Seller’s right to retain down payment on buyer’s unjustified refusal to accept goods, 11 A.L.R.2d 701. Rights and duties of parties to conditional sales contract as to resale of repossessed property, 49 A.L.R.2d 15. Infant’s liability for use or depreciation of subject matter, in action to recover purchase price upon his disaffirmance of contract to purchase goods, 12 A.L.R.3d 1174. Repossession by secured seller as affecting his right to recover on note or other obligation given as a down payment, 49 A.L.R.3d 364.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1985–2007 · leading case: Imex Int'l, Inc. v. Wires Eng'g, 583 S.E.2d 117 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Imex Int'l, Inc. v. Wires Eng'g, 583 S.E.2d 117 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 11-2-703; Lipsey Motors v. Karp Motors, supra at 19 (3); Cochran v.”

Franklin v. Demico, Inc., 347 S.E.2d 718 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 4× “Since the sale of goods was involved, we turn to the provisions of the UCC found in OCGA Title 11, especially OCGA §§ 11-2-703 through 710, setting out seller's remedies for buyer's breach of a sales transaction.”

Lipsey Motors v. Karp Motors, Inc., 389 S.E.2d 537 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Appellant asserts that the measure of damages contained in OCGA §11-2-708 should be applied.”

Mitchell Motors, Inc. v. Barnett, 549 S.E.2d 445 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “7 See OCGA § 11-2-703; Touche, Inc. v. Dearborn, 161 Ga.”

F. L. Saino Mfg. Co. v. Fireman's Fund Ins., 328 S.E.2d 387 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “Although the provisions of the commercial code allow appellant to segregate specially manufactured goods upon nonpayment by the buyer, see OCGA §§ 11-2-703, 11-2-704, we do not agree with appellant’s argument that its unilateral act of storing the goods on April 22, 1983…”

Rowland v. Scarborough Farms, LLC, 648 S.E.2d 151 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “Nonetheless, there is a factual dispute as to whether Scarborough was entitled to cancel the contract on April 3, 2003, pursuant to OCGA § 11-2-703. That statute provides, in pertinent part, that “[w]here the buyer .”

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.