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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2601 (2026)

Improper delivery; buyer's rights.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE


Act 174 of 1962


440.2601 Improper delivery; buyer's rights.

Sec. 2601.

    Subject to the provisions of this article on breach in installment contracts (section 2612) and unless otherwise agreed under the sections on contractual limitations of remedy (sections 2718 and 2719), if the goods or the tender of delivery fail in any respect to conform to the contract, the buyer may

    (a) reject the whole; or

    (b) accept the whole; or

    (c) accept any commercial unit or units and reject the rest.

History: 1962, Act 174, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1970–2017 · leading case: Head v. Phillips Camper Sales & Rental, Inc, 593 N.W.2d 595 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Head v. Phillips Camper Sales & Rental, Inc, 593 N.W.2d 595 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). “2508; MSA 19.2508. The seller can also recover damages if the buyer wrongfully rejects.”
Capitol Dodge Sales, Inc v. N. Concrete Pipe, Inc, 346 N.W.2d 535 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “2606, and that defendant had an absolute right to reject the truck, MCL 440.2601; MSA 19.2601. The evidence shows that on November 8 or 9, 1978, 3 an officer of defendant, William Washa *153 baugh, called at plaintiffs place of business to discuss the possible purchase of a…”
Colonial Dodge, Inc. v. Miller, 328 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “MCL 440.2601; MSA 19.2601. The UCC limits the perfect tender rule only by express delineation found in § 2-612, MCL 440.”
North Am. Steel Corp. v. Siderius, Inc., 254 N.W.2d 899 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). “It is clear that defendant is correct in asserting that this particular trade usage was part of the contract and acted as a contractual limitation of the rejection remedy of the buyer under MCLA 440.2601; MSA 19.2601. See MCLA 440.”
Valley Die Cast Corp. v. A.C.W., Inc., 181 N.W.2d 303 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 2× “, the replacement brush system, could be found by a jury to be a “commercial unit”, refers to MCLA § 440.2601 (Stat Ann 1964 Eev § 19.2601) which allows a buyer to “accept any commercial unit or units and reject the rest.”
Distco Laminating, Inc. v. Union Tool Corp., 265 N.W.2d 768 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978). “Plaintiff contends that MCLA 440.2601; MSA 19.2601 which provides that a buyer may reject goods where the goods fail to conform to the contract applies.”
Intervale Steel v. Borg & Beck Div., Borg-Warner, 578 F. Supp. 1081 (E.D. Mich. 1984). “§§ 440.2601 & .2602. 18 . See Colonial Dodge, Inc.”
Extrusion Painting, Inc. v. Awnings Unlimited, Inc., 37 F. Supp. 2d 985 (E.D. Mich. 1999). “The general rule applicable to a single delivery contract is “if the goods or the tender of delivery fail in any respect to conform to the contract, the buyer may (a) reject the whole; or (b) accept the whole; or (c) accept any commercial unit or units and reject the rest.”
Renco Elec. Inc v. Uusi LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “MCL 440.2601. However, Nartron concedes that “[r]ejection of goods must be within a reasonable time after their delivery or tender.”
Renco Elec. Inc v. Uusi LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “MCL 440.2601. However, Nartron concedes that “[r]ejection of goods must be within a reasonable time after their delivery or tender.”
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.