810 ILCS 5/2-206
Offer and acceptance in formation of contract
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(810 ILCS 5/2-206)
(from Ch. 26, par. 2-206)
Sec. 2-206.
Offer and acceptance in formation of contract.
(1) Unless otherwise unambiguously indicated by the language or
circumstances
(a) an offer to make a contract shall be construed as | inviting acceptance in any manner and by any medium reasonable in the circumstances; |
(b) an order or other offer to buy goods for prompt | or current shipment shall be construed as inviting acceptance either by a prompt promise to ship or by the prompt or current shipment of conforming or non-conforming goods, but such a shipment of non-conforming goods does not constitute an acceptance if the seller seasonably notifies the buyer that the shipment is offered only as an accommodation to the buyer. |
(2) Where the beginning of a requested performance is a reasonable mode
of acceptance an offeror who is not notified of acceptance within a
reasonable time may treat the offer as having lapsed before acceptance.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 2101.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2023 · leading case: Echo, Incorporated, an Illinois Corporation v. The Whitson Company, Inc. D/B/A Power Tool Company, a Tennessee Corporati
Echo, Incorporated, an Illinois Corporation v. The Whitson Company, Inc. D/B/A Power Tool Company, a Tennessee Corporati (1995)
“810 ILCS 5/2-206(1). It also provides that, upon notifying the seller, the buyer “may deduct all or any part of the damages resulting from any breach of the contract from any part of the price still due under the same contract.”
Fabrica De Tejidos Imperial, S.A. v. Brandon Apparel Group, Inc. (2002)
“8 Illinois has adopted the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”), which provides in relevant part (810 ILCS 5/2-206(b) 9 ): [A]n order or other offer by buy goods for prompt or current shipment shall be construed as inviting acceptance either by a prompt promise to ship or by the…”
Pamado, Inc. v. Hedinger Brands, LLC (2011)
“1995) (citing 810 ILCS 5/2-206(1)). The Illinois Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provides, however, that “[t]he *712 buyer * * * may deduct all or any part of the damages resulting from any breach of the contract from any part of the price still due under the same contract.”
To-Am Equipment Co. v. Mitsubishi Caterpillar Forklift America (1995)
“1995) (citing 810 ILCS 5/2-206(1)). The Illinois Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provides, however, that “[t]he buyer .”
Tibor MacHine Products, Inc. v. Freudenberg-Nok General Partnership (1997)
“” 810 ILCS 5/2-206(l)(a) (1993). FNGP challenges Tibor’s allegation that FNGP accepted the terms of the putative contract through the 1992 POs.”
G & G Peppers, LLC v. Ebro Foods, Inc. (In Re Ebro Foods, Inc.) (2010)
“810 ILCS 5/2-206 (2006). In this ease, G & G accepted the contract proposed in Ebro’s purchase orders by signing the orders and faxing them to Ebro.”
ASD Specialty Healthcare, LLC v. Community First Healthcare of Illinois, Inc. (2023)
“§§ 2206–07 and 810 ILCS 5/2-206 and 5/2-207. In a case which turns on the application of the UCC, it does not matter which state’s law applies so long as the disputed states have each adopted the UCC.”
Crossroads Ford Truck Sales, Inc. v. Sterling Truck Corp. (2003)
“) 810 ILCS 5/2-206(1)(a) (West 2000). Because defendant's offer did not say, clearly or otherwise, that signing the 2001 addendum was the only permissible way to accept it, plaintiff could accept the 2001 addendum by signing the agreement, of which the 2001 addendum was…”
— 810 ILCS 5/2-206(1) — 3 cases
Echo, Incorporated, an Illinois Corporation v. The Whitson Company, Inc. D/B/A Power Tool Company, a Tennessee Corporati (1995)
“810 ILCS 5/2-206(1). It also provides that, upon notifying the seller, the buyer “may deduct all or any part of the damages resulting from any breach of the contract from any part of the price still due under the same contract.”
Pamado, Inc. v. Hedinger Brands, LLC (2011)
“1995) (citing 810 ILCS 5/2-206(1)). The Illinois Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provides, however, that “[t]he *712 buyer * * * may deduct all or any part of the damages resulting from any breach of the contract from any part of the price still due under the same contract.”
To-Am Equipment Co. v. Mitsubishi Caterpillar Forklift America (1995)
“1995) (citing 810 ILCS 5/2-206(1)). The Illinois Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provides, however, that “[t]he buyer .”
— 810 ILCS 5/2-206(1)(a) — 1 case
Crossroads Ford Truck Sales, Inc. v. Sterling Truck Corp. (2003)
“) 810 ILCS 5/2-206(1)(a) (West 2000). Because defendant's offer did not say, clearly or otherwise, that signing the 2001 addendum was the only permissible way to accept it, plaintiff could accept the 2001 addendum by signing the agreement, of which the 2001 addendum was…”
— 810 ILCS 5/2-206(b) — 2 cases
Fabrica De Tejidos Imperial, S.A. v. Brandon Apparel Group, Inc. (2002)
“8 Illinois has adopted the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”), which provides in relevant part (810 ILCS 5/2-206(b) 9 ): [A]n order or other offer by buy goods for prompt or current shipment shall be construed as inviting acceptance either by a prompt promise to ship or by the…”
G & G Peppers, LLC v. Ebro Foods, Inc. (In Re Ebro Foods, Inc.) (2010)
“810 ILCS 5/2-206 (2006). In this ease, G & G accepted the contract proposed in Ebro’s purchase orders by signing the orders and faxing them to Ebro.”
— 810 ILCS 5/2-206(l)(a) — 1 case
Tibor MacHine Products, Inc. v. Freudenberg-Nok General Partnership (1997)
“” 810 ILCS 5/2-206(l)(a) (1993). FNGP challenges Tibor’s allegation that FNGP accepted the terms of the putative contract through the 1992 POs.”
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.
|