Miss. Code Ann. » Miss. Code Ann. / Title 75 / Chapter 1
Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 75-1-106 (2024)

Use of singular and plural; gender

✓ Justia copy: laws through about 2024 (2025 and 2026 sessions missing)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In the Uniform Commercial Code, unless the statutory context otherwise requires:

Former § 75-1-106 [Codes, 1942, § 41A:1-106; Laws, 1966, ch. 316, § 1-106, eff. 3/31/1968; repealed by Laws, 2010, ch. 506, § 44, eff. 7/1/2010] is now found in comparable provisions enacted at § 75-1-305 by Laws, 2010, ch. 506, § 3, eff. 7/1/2010; Present § 75-1-106 is derived from former § 75-1-102(b)[Codes, 1942, § 41A:1-102; Laws, 1966, ch. 316, § 1-102, eff. 3/31/1968; repealed by Laws, 2010, ch. 506, § 44, eff. 7/1/2010] and was enacted by Laws, 2010, ch. 506, § 3, eff. 7/1/2010.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1986–2006 · leading case: Fedders Corp. v. Boatright, 493 So. 2d 301 (Miss. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fedders Corp. v. Boatright, 493 So. 2d 301 (Miss. 1986). “" See Miss. Code Ann. § 75-1-106 (1); Goetz v. Security Industrial Bank, 508 P.”
Berhow v. Peoples Bank, 423 F. Supp. 2d 562 (S.D. Miss. 2006). “” Miss. Code Ann. § 75-1-106 cmt. n. 1. Thus, in this case, Berhow’s remedy is to recover on the “underlying obligation” which is a credit in the amount of the loans, plus interest, obtained by Seymour in Berhow’s name.”
Hancock Bank v. Ensenat, 819 So. 2d 3 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 75-1-106(1)(1972). The official comments to section 1-106 state that this section was intended "to make it clear that compensatory damages are limited to compensation.”
Terex Corp. v. Ingalls Shipbuilding, Inc., 671 So. 2d 1316 (Miss. 1996). “1991); Miss. Code Ann. § 75-1-106 (1) (1972). This Court has held that: Once the jury has returned a verdict in a civil case, we are not at liberty to direct that judgment be entered contrary to that verdict short of a conclusion on our part that given the evidence as a whole,…”
Dawkins & Co. v. L & L PLANTING CO., 602 So. 2d 838 (Miss. 1992). “(2)(a) to simplify, clarify and modernize the law governing commercial transactions; (b) to permit the continued expansion of commercial practices through custom, usage and agreement of the parties; Miss. Code Ann. § 75-1-106 (1972) provides: (1) The remedies provided by this…”
Terex Corp v. Ingalls Shipblding Inc, No. 92-CA-00690-SCT (Miss. Mar. 2, 1992). “The goal of the cover remedy is to place the buyer only in as good a position as he would have occupied had the seller performed.”
Miss. Code Ann. § 75-1-106(1)(1972): 1 case
Hancock Bank v. Ensenat, 819 So. 2d 3 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 75-1-106(1)(1972). The official comments to section 1-106 state that this section was intended "to make it clear that compensatory damages are limited to compensation.”
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.