Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 11
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607 (2026)

Effect of acceptance; notice of breach; burden of establishing breach after acceptance; notice of claim or litigation to person answerable over

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1).  The buyer must pay at the contract rate for any goods accepted.  
(2).  Acceptance of goods by the buyer precludes rejection of the goods accepted and, if made with knowledge of a nonconformity, cannot be revoked because of it unless the acceptance was on the reasonable assumption that the nonconformity would be seasonably cured but acceptance does not of itself impair any other remedy provided by this Article for nonconformity.  
(3).  Where a tender has been accepted,  
(a). The buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify the seller of breach or be barred from any remedy; and  
(b). If the claim is one for infringement or the like (section 2‑312, subsection (3)), and the buyer is sued as a result of such a breach he must so notify the seller within a reasonable time after he receives notice of the litigation or be barred from any remedy over for liability established by the litigation.  
(4).  The burden is on the buyer to establish any breach with respect to the goods accepted.  
(5).  Where the buyer is sued for breach of a warranty or other obligation for which his seller is answerable over,  
(a). He may give his seller written notice of the litigation. If the notice states that the seller may come in and defend and that if the seller does not do so he will be bound in any action against him by his buyer by any determination of fact common to the 2 litigations, then unless the seller after seasonable receipt of the notice does come in and defend he is so bound.  
(b). If the claim is one for infringement or the like (section 2‑312, subsection (3)) the original seller, may demand in writing that his buyer turn over to him control of the litigation including settlement or else be barred from any remedy over and if he also agrees to bear all expense and to satisfy any adverse judgment, then unless the buyer after seasonable receipt of the demand does turn over control the buyer is so barred.  
(6).  The provisions of subsections (3), (4) and (5) apply to any obligation of a buyer to hold the seller harmless against infringement or the like (section 2‑312, subsection (3)).  
(7).  Subsection (3), paragraph (a) shall not apply where the remedy is for personal injury resulting from any breach.  
[PL 1973, c. 443, §1 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1973, c. 443, §1 (AMD).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1982–2016 · leading case: Adams v. Buffalo Forge Co., 443 A.2d 932 (Me. 1982).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Adams v. Buffalo Forge Co., 443 A.2d 932 (Me. 1982). · cites it 4× “" The Legislature added a subsection 7 to 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607 in that year to provide that notice is not required "where the remedy is for personal injury.”
In re Rust-Oleum Restore Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., 155 F. Supp. 3d 772 (N.D. Ill. 2016). “Code § ll-2-607(3)(a); Idaho Code § 28-2-607 (3)(a); 810 ILCS 5/2-607(3)(a); Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607(3)(a);' Minn.”
Muehlbauer v. Gen. Motors Corp., 431 F. Supp. 2d 847 (N.D. Ill. 2006). · cites it 2× “Count TV — Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability Defendant next contends that the breach of implied warranty of merchantability claim must be dismissed on two grounds: Bisson’s failure to provide notice of the breach under 11 M.R.S. § 2-607, and his failure to plead that…”
M.K. Assocs. v. Stowell Prods., Inc., 697 F. Supp. 20 (D. Me. 1988). · cites it 5× “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607, Uniform Commercial Code (U.”
Sullivan v. Young Bros. & Co. Inc., 893 F. Supp. 1148 (D. Me. 1995). · cites it 3× “Accordingly, Plaintiffs notice to Young Brothers was sufficient to satisfy the requirements of 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607(3). Defendant Vernay also contends that judgment should be entered in its favor because Plaintiffs insurers made payments to Plaintiff as “volunteers” and were…”
Roger Edwards, LLC. v. Fiddes & Son, Ltd., 245 F. Supp. 2d 251 (D. Me. 2003). “Assuming arguendo, as the parties apparently do, that the terms of the UCC apply to the counterclaim based on the invoices, 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607 provides that the buyer must pay at the contract rate for accepted goods and that acceptance of the goods precludes rejection.”
Am. Aerial Servs., Inc. v. Terex USA, LLC, 39 F. Supp. 3d 95 (D. Me. 2014). “(2) Adequacy of Notice Where a tender has been accepted, the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify the seller of breach or be barred from any remedy; 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607(3)(a) (the “Maine UCC”).”
Adamatic v. Progressive Baking Co., Inc., 667 A.2d 871 (Me. 1995). “” This instruction added a gloss to 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607(1) (1995), which states “the buyer must pay at the contract rate for any goods accepted.”
Fox Island Granite Co., Inc. v. Am. Granite Mfrs., Inc. (Me. Super. Ct 2005). “" 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607. In addition, the general manager of the defendant testified that the goods that had been delivered and whch he inspected back in 2002, had either been cut to slabs for sale or put in the junk pile.”
Town of Winthrop v. Bailey Bros., Inc. (Me. Super. Ct 2014). “§ 2-315, 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-313. For a buyer's claim ofbreach ofwarranties or 6 breach of contract to survive a motion for summary judgment, the buyer has to establish a breach with respect to the goods accepted in the sale.”
DCCI, LLC v. Kendrick Parker (Me. Super. Ct 2015). “Defendant Parker seeks summary judgment on two somewhat narrow grounds.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607(1) — 1 case
Adamatic v. Progressive Baking Co., Inc., 667 A.2d 871 (Me. 1995). “” This instruction added a gloss to 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607(1) (1995), which states “the buyer must pay at the contract rate for any goods accepted.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607(2) — 1 case
M.K. Assocs. v. Stowell Prods., Inc., 697 F. Supp. 20 (D. Me. 1988). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607, Uniform Commercial Code (U.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607(3) — 2 cases
Sullivan v. Young Bros. & Co. Inc., 893 F. Supp. 1148 (D. Me. 1995). “Accordingly, Plaintiffs notice to Young Brothers was sufficient to satisfy the requirements of 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607(3). Defendant Vernay also contends that judgment should be entered in its favor because Plaintiffs insurers made payments to Plaintiff as “volunteers” and were…”
DCCI, LLC v. Kendrick Parker (Me. Super. Ct 2015). “Defendant Parker seeks summary judgment on two somewhat narrow grounds.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607(3)(a) — 5 cases
In re Rust-Oleum Restore Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., 155 F. Supp. 3d 772 (N.D. Ill. 2016). “Code § ll-2-607(3)(a); Idaho Code § 28-2-607 (3)(a); 810 ILCS 5/2-607(3)(a); Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607(3)(a);' Minn.”
Muehlbauer v. Gen. Motors Corp., 431 F. Supp. 2d 847 (N.D. Ill. 2006). “Count TV — Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability Defendant next contends that the breach of implied warranty of merchantability claim must be dismissed on two grounds: Bisson’s failure to provide notice of the breach under 11 M.R.S. § 2-607, and his failure to plead that…”
Am. Aerial Servs., Inc. v. Terex USA, LLC, 39 F. Supp. 3d 95 (D. Me. 2014). “(2) Adequacy of Notice Where a tender has been accepted, the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify the seller of breach or be barred from any remedy; 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607(3)(a) (the “Maine UCC”).”
M.K. Assocs. v. Stowell Prods., Inc., 697 F. Supp. 20 (D. Me. 1988). “See 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607, Uniform Commercial Code (U.”
Sullivan v. Young Bros. & Co. Inc., 893 F. Supp. 1148 (D. Me. 1995). “Accordingly, Plaintiffs notice to Young Brothers was sufficient to satisfy the requirements of 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607(3). Defendant Vernay also contends that judgment should be entered in its favor because Plaintiffs insurers made payments to Plaintiff as “volunteers” and were…”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607(4) — 1 case
Town of Winthrop v. Bailey Bros., Inc. (Me. Super. Ct 2014). “§ 2-315, 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-313. For a buyer's claim ofbreach ofwarranties or 6 breach of contract to survive a motion for summary judgment, the buyer has to establish a breach with respect to the goods accepted in the sale.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607(7) — 1 case
Adams v. Buffalo Forge Co., 443 A.2d 932 (Me. 1982). “" The Legislature added a subsection 7 to 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607 in that year to provide that notice is not required "where the remedy is for personal injury.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 11, § 2-607(8) — 1 case
Sullivan v. Young Bros. & Co. Inc., 893 F. Supp. 1148 (D. Me. 1995). “Accordingly, Plaintiffs notice to Young Brothers was sufficient to satisfy the requirements of 11 M.R.S.A. § 2-607(3). Defendant Vernay also contends that judgment should be entered in its favor because Plaintiffs insurers made payments to Plaintiff as “volunteers” and were…”
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.