O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 11-2-710 (2019)

Seller’s incidental damages

✓ 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

Incidental damages to an aggrieved seller include any commercially reasonable charges, expenses, or commissions incurred in stopping delivery, in the transportation, care, and custody of goods after the buyer’s breach, in connection with return or resale of the goods or otherwise resulting from the breach.

History

Code 1933, § 109A-2-710, enacted by Ga. L. 1962, p. 156, § 1.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Test of commercial reasonableness. - Incidental damages include all commercially reasonable expenditures. The test of commercial reasonableness is a practical one, requiring primarily honesty and good faith in attempting to minimize damages. What is commercially reasonable is to be determined from all facts and circumstances of each case, and must be judged in light of one viewing situation at time problem was presented. Beckman Cotton Co. v. First Nat’l Bank, 666 F.2d 181, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22396 (5th Cir. 1982).

Payment to purchaser representing difference between contract and market prices. - Payment to foreign purchaser, where it was merely refund of difference between original contract price of cotton and then prevailing international market price of cotton, was appropriate and commercially reasonable. Beckman Cotton Co. v. First Nat’l Bank, 666 F.2d 181, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22396 (5th Cir. 1982).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 50 Am. Jur. 2d, Letter of Credit, and Credit Cards, § 75 et seq. 67A Am. Jur. 2d, Sales, §§ 997-1001. Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms. 6 Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Commercial Code, § 2:721. U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 2710. ALR. Expense of caring for personal property prior to its resale upon failure of sale contract, 29 A.L.R. 61. Valuation clause in carrier’s contract as

limit, or as ratio, of recovery in case of partial loss, 41 A.L.R. 450. Rights and remedies upon cancelation of sales agency, 52 A.L.R. 546; 89 A.L.R. 252. Measure of damages for buyer’s repudiation of or failure to accept goods under executory contract, 108 A.L.R. 1482. Interest as element of damages recoverable in action for breach of contract for the sale of a commodity, 4 A.L.R.2d 1388. Measure of damages for buyer’s breach of contract to purchase article from dealer or manufacturer’s agent, 24 A.L.R.2d 1008.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1986–2020 · leading case: Franklin v. Demico, Inc., 347 S.E.2d 718 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Franklin v. Demico, Inc., 347 S.E.2d 718 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 8× “" OCGA § 11-2-710 defines "incidental damages" as: "any commercially reasonable charges, expenses or commissions incurred in stopping delivery, in the transportation, care, and custody of goods after the buyer's breach, in connection with return or resale of the goods or…”

Unique Designs, Inc. v. Pittard Mach. Co., 409 S.E.2d 241 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “rovides: “If the measure of damages provided in subsection (1) of this Code section is inadequate to put the seller in as good a position as performance would have done then the measure of damages is the profit (including reasonable overhead) which the seller would have made…”

Ultra Grp. of Companies, Inc. v. S & a 1488 Mgmt., Inc. (Ga. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “22 In that case, the seller carried a large inventory of lathes, the lathe to be delivered to the buyer was a stock item not specially ordered, and the seller’s subsequent sale of the lathes to another buyer would have occurred even if the original buyer had not repudiated the…”

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.