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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2602

Rejection of goods.

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

UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE


Act 174 of 1962


440.2602 Rejection of goods.

Sec. 2602.

    (1)  Rejection of goods must be within a reasonable time after their delivery or tender. It is ineffective unless the buyer seasonably notifies the seller.

    (2) Subject to the provisions of the 2 following sections on rejected goods (sections 2603 and 2604),

    (a) after rejection any exercise of ownership by the buyer with respect to any commercial unit is wrongful as against the seller; and

    (b) if the buyer has before rejection taken physical possession of goods in which he does not have a security interest under the provisions of this article (subsection (3) of section 2711), he is under a duty after rejection to hold them with reasonable care at the seller's disposition for a time sufficient to permit the seller to remove them; but

    (c) the buyer has no further obligations with regard to goods rightfully rejected.

    (3) The seller's rights with respect to goods wrongfully rejected are governed by the provisions of this article on seller's remedies in general (section 2703).

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1971–2025 · leading case: Minsel v. El Rancho Mobile Home Center, Inc.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Minsel v. El Rancho Mobile Home Center, Inc. (1971) michctapp · cites it 7× “We note that plaintiffs’ continued use of the home for some six weeks after rejection did not injure defendants in any way, in fact, under the circumstances, and in view of defendants’ failure to respond to the notification of September 10, 1968, such occupancy served as added…”
Eaton Corp. v. Magnavox Co. (1984) mied · cites it 4× “Mich.Comp.Laws Ann. §§ 440.2602, 440.-2608; see generally J.”
Colonial Dodge, Inc. v. Miller (1982) michctapp · cites it 4× “Since there was no acceptance on the part of this buyer within the UCC meaning of that term, I would hold § 2-608, MCL 440.”
King v. Taylor Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc (1990) michctapp · cites it 2× “] MCL 440.2602(2); MSA 19.2602(2) provides that if a buyer rejects goods and (b) if the buyer has before rejection taken physical possession of goods .”
Head v. Phillips Camper Sales & Rental, Inc (1999) michctapp “MCL 440.2602(2)(b) & (c); MSA 19.2602(2)(b) & (c), MCL 440.”
Colonial Dodge, Inc v. Miller (1985) mich · cites it 2× “" MCL 440.2602(2)(b) and (c); MSA 19.2602(2)(b) and (c).”
S C Gray, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co. (1979) michctapp “MCL 440.2602(1); MSA 19.2602(1). The testimony of Richard Gray indicates that at the August 12, 1971, tryout the electronic package drove the test stands at 70 parts per hour but, due to the capabilities of the basic machine, accurate test results were not achieved.”
Capitol Dodge Sales, Inc v. Northern Concrete Pipe, Inc (1983) michctapp · cites it 2× “MCL 440.2602; MSA 19.2602. It did so. Reversed and remanded for entry of judgment in favor of defendant.”
North American Steel Corp. v. Siderius, Inc. (1977) michctapp “MCLA 440.2602(1); MSA 19.2602(1). Defendant next contends the arbitrators erred in concluding the contract called for delivery of Class I steel.”
Colonial Dodge, Inc v. Miller (1982) michctapp · cites it 8× “MCL 440.2602; MSA 19.2602. It is undisputed that on the morning after taking delivery of the station wagon, Mr.”
Intervale Steel v. Borg & Beck Div., Borg-Warner (1984) mied “) It should be noted that the "any use” language of subsection (l)(c) requires this interpretation in order for the other subsections to have' meaning.”
Fremont Insurance Company v. Gro-Green Farms Inc (2016) michctapp · cites it 3× “2606, plaintiffs failed to reject the goods pursuant to MCL 440.2602, and plaintiffs cannot show proximate cause necessary to recover consequential damages pursuant to MCL 440.”
Show all 21 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2602(1) — 5 cases
S C Gray, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co. (1979) michctapp “MCL 440.2602(1); MSA 19.2602(1). The testimony of Richard Gray indicates that at the August 12, 1971, tryout the electronic package drove the test stands at 70 parts per hour but, due to the capabilities of the basic machine, accurate test results were not achieved.”
North American Steel Corp. v. Siderius, Inc. (1977) michctapp “MCLA 440.2602(1); MSA 19.2602(1). Defendant next contends the arbitrators erred in concluding the contract called for delivery of Class I steel.”
Intervale Steel v. Borg & Beck Div., Borg-Warner (1984) mied “) It should be noted that the "any use” language of subsection (l)(c) requires this interpretation in order for the other subsections to have' meaning.”
Fremont Insurance Company v. Gro-Green Farms Inc (2016) michctapp “2606, plaintiffs failed to reject the goods pursuant to MCL 440.2602, and plaintiffs cannot show proximate cause necessary to recover consequential damages pursuant to MCL 440.”
Koviack Irrigation and Farm Services v. Maple Row Farms LLC (2017) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2602(2) — 2 cases
Minsel v. El Rancho Mobile Home Center, Inc. (1971) michctapp “We note that plaintiffs’ continued use of the home for some six weeks after rejection did not injure defendants in any way, in fact, under the circumstances, and in view of defendants’ failure to respond to the notification of September 10, 1968, such occupancy served as added…”
King v. Taylor Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc (1990) michctapp “] MCL 440.2602(2); MSA 19.2602(2) provides that if a buyer rejects goods and (b) if the buyer has before rejection taken physical possession of goods .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2602(2)(a) — 2 cases
Miguel Gomez v. Mercedes-Benz USA LLC (2018) michctapp
Miguel Gomez v. Mercedes-Benz USA LLC (2018) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2602(2)(b) — 6 cases
Eaton Corp. v. Magnavox Co. (1984) mied “Mich.Comp.Laws Ann. §§ 440.2602, 440.-2608; see generally J.”
Head v. Phillips Camper Sales & Rental, Inc (1999) michctapp “MCL 440.2602(2)(b) & (c); MSA 19.2602(2)(b) & (c), MCL 440.”
Colonial Dodge, Inc v. Miller (1985) mich “" MCL 440.2602(2)(b) and (c); MSA 19.2602(2)(b) and (c).”
King v. Taylor Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc (1990) michctapp “] MCL 440.2602(2); MSA 19.2602(2) provides that if a buyer rejects goods and (b) if the buyer has before rejection taken physical possession of goods .”
Miguel Gomez v. Mercedes-Benz USA LLC (2018) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.2602(2)(c) — 2 cases
Colonial Dodge, Inc. v. Miller (1982) michctapp “Since there was no acceptance on the part of this buyer within the UCC meaning of that term, I would hold § 2-608, MCL 440.”
Colonial Dodge, Inc v. Miller (1982) michctapp “MCL 440.2602; MSA 19.2602. It is undisputed that on the morning after taking delivery of the station wagon, Mr.”
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.