Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 440 / Act 174 of 1962

Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2208

Repealed. 2012, Act 86, Eff. July 1, 2013.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE


Act 174 of 1962


440.2208 Repealed. 2012, Act 86, Eff. July 1, 2013.

    Repealed. 2012, Act 86, Eff. July 1, 2013.

Compiler's Notes:

    The repealed section pertained to course of performance.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1972–2020 · leading case: Iverson Industries, Inc. v. Metal Management Ohio, Inc.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Iverson Industries, Inc. v. Metal Management Ohio, Inc. (2007) mied · cites it 10× “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2208 (1). However, that section also creates a hierarchy of evidence that establishes contract terms when performance is inconsistent with other proof, under which express contract provisions prevail over course of performance, which in turn prevails…”
Fisher Sand & Gravel Co. v. Neal a Sweebe, Inc. (2013) mich · cites it 2× “1205 and MCL 440.2208]. Whether an agreement has legal consequences is determined by the provisions of this act, if applicable; otherwise by the law of contracts [MCL 440.”
Sullivan Industries, Inc. v. Double Seal Glass Co. (1991) michctapp “” In this case, the evidence established that Double Seal’s written warranty clearly and expressly limited Sullivan’s remedy to replacement of the failed igus; that on at least three occasions, when failure rates were greater than normal, Double Seal either voluntarily or by…”
In Re Frost Estate (1983) michctapp “This would be evidence of course of performance (see MCL 440.2208; MSA 19.2208), and therefore admissible as parol evidence under MCL 440.”
Ditzik v. Schaffer Lumber Co. (1984) michctapp “(Although the Uniform Commercial Code does not apply to real estate transactions, compare MCL 440.2208; MSA 19.2208 and Comment 4 thereto indicating that a single occasion of conduct does not comprise a course of performance or course of dealing.”
Boyd v. Toyobo America, Inc. (In Re Second Chance Body Armor, Inc.) (2009) miwb · cites it 2× “” Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 440.2208 (1). 8 .”
Flamm v. Scherer (1972) michctapp “…we affirm the findings and the disposition by the trial court. All concurred. 1 MCLA 440.1205; MSA 19.1205 2 MCLA 440.2208; MSA 19.2208”
Kvaerner U.S., Inc. v. Hakim Plast Co. (1999) mied “§ 440.2208(1), M.S.A. § 19.2204(1) allows: Where the contract for sale involves repeated occasions for performance by either party with knowledge of the nature of the performance and opportunity for objection to it by the other, any course of performance accepted or acquiesced…”
Radiance Aluminum Fence, Inc. v. Marquis Metal Material Inc. (2020) mied · cites it 6× “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2208 (1). That section also creates “a hierarchy of evidence” that establishes contract terms when performance is inconsistent with other proof, under which express contract provisions prevail over course of performance, which in turn prevails over…”
Gest v. Frost (1983) michctapp “This would be evidence of course of performance (see MCL 440.2208; MSA 19.2208), and therefore admissible as parol evidence under MCL 440.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2208(1) — 1 case
Kvaerner U.S., Inc. v. Hakim Plast Co. (1999) mied “§ 440.2208(1), M.S.A. § 19.2204(1) allows: Where the contract for sale involves repeated occasions for performance by either party with knowledge of the nature of the performance and opportunity for objection to it by the other, any course of performance accepted or acquiesced…”
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.