Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-711 (2026)
Buyer's remedies in general; buyer's security interest in rejected goods
✓ current as of July 2026
- (1) Where the seller fails to make delivery or repudiates or the buyer rightfully rejects or justifiably revokes acceptance then with respect to any goods involved, and with respect to the whole if the breach goes to the whole contract (Section 2-612) [Section 75-2-612], the buyer may cancel and whether or not he has done so may in addition to recovering so much of the price as has been paid
- (a) "cover" and have damages under Section 75-2-712 as to all the goods affected whether or not they have been identified to the contract; or
- (b) recover damages for nondelivery as provided in this chapter (Section 2-713) [Section 75-2-713].
- (2) Where the seller fails to deliver or repudiates the buyer may also
- (a) if the goods have been identified recover them as provided in this chapter (Section 2-502) [Section 75-2-502]; or
- (b) in a proper case obtain specific performance or replevy the goods as provided in this chapter (Section 2-716) [Section 75-2-716].
- (3) On rightful rejection or justifiable revocation of acceptance a buyer has a security interest in goods in his possession or control for any payments made on their price and any expenses reasonably incurred in their inspection, receipt, transportation, care and custody and may hold such goods and resell them in like manner as an aggrieved seller (Section 2-706) [Section 75-2-706].
Codes, 1942, § 41A:2-711; Laws, 1966, ch. 316, § 2-711, eff. 3/31/1968.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1982–1994 · leading case: Gast v. Rogers-Dingus Chevrolet, 585 So. 2d 725 (Miss. 1991).
Gast v. Rogers-Dingus Chevrolet, 585 So. 2d 725 (Miss. 1991). “Damages for breach of the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose are allowable under two separate sections of our Uniform Commercial Code, Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-711 , 75-2-714 (Supp.”
Royal Lincoln-Mercury Sales v. Wallace, 415 So. 2d 1024 (Miss. 1982). “" From this premise Ford argues there is no evidence in the *1028 record that it either sold or contracted to sell anything to Wallace and therefore, the remedies provided in Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-711 do not apply to it.”
Beck Enter., Inc. v. Hester, 512 So. 2d 672 (Miss. 1987). “Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-711 (1) (1972). [5] *677 In addition to the remedies described above, a buyer who successfully sues for breach of warranty may recover litigation expenses under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act codified at 15 U.”
Louis Dreyfus Corp., Cross-Appellant v. J.B. Brown & Michael Smith, Cross-Appellees, 709 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1983). “Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-711(1) (1972). Finally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff did not prove it was damaged by the transaction.”
Fid. Fincl Servs Inc v. Carolyn Randolph (Miss. 1994). “(1) However, Damages for breach of the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose are allowable under two separate sections of our Uniform Commercial code, Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-711 , 75-2-714 (Supp.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-711(1) — 1 case
Louis Dreyfus Corp., Cross-Appellant v. J.B. Brown & Michael Smith, Cross-Appellees, 709 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1983). “Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-711(1) (1972). Finally, the defendants argue that the plaintiff did not prove it was damaged by the transaction.”
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.