Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-714 (2026)

Buyer's damages for breach in regard to accepted goods

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Where the buyer has accepted goods and given notification (subsection (3) of Section 2-607) [Section 75-2-607] he may recover as damages for any nonconformity of tender the loss resulting in the ordinary course of events from the seller's breach as determined in any manner which is reasonable.

(2) The measure of damages for breach of warranty is the difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have had if they had been as warranted, unless special circumstances show proximate damages of a different amount.

(3) In a proper case any incidental and consequential damages under Section 75-2-715 may also be recovered.

Codes, 1942, § 41A:2-714; Laws, 1966, ch. 316, § 2-714, eff. 3/31/1968.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases, 1974–2014 · leading case: George A. MacKenzie v. Chrysler Corp., 607 F.2d 1162 (5th Cir. 1979).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

George A. MacKenzie v. Chrysler Corp., 607 F.2d 1162 (5th Cir. 1979). · cites it 2× “” Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-714(2) (1972) (as amended).”

Beck Enter., Inc. v. Hester, 512 So. 2d 672 (Miss. 1987). · cites it 2× “The damages available under the UCC include, but are not limited to, compensatory damages under Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-714 (1972), incidental damages under § 75-2-715(1), and consequential damages under § 75-2-715(2).”

Mercury Marine v. Clear River Const. Co., 839 So. 2d 508 (Miss. 2003). · cites it 2× “Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-714 (2000). This section provides that "damages for any non-conformity of tender" may be "determined in any manner which is reasonable.”

JL Teel Co., Inc. v. Houston United Sales, 491 So. 2d 851 (Miss. 1986). “[10] Economically, the impact of the approach we apply is the same as if we allow Houston to recover for breach of warranty, the difference between the contract price (aggregate of monthly rentals), and the value of what he in fact received (reasonable value of use between May…”

Gast v. Rogers-Dingus Chevrolet, 585 So. 2d 725 (Miss. 1991). “Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-714 (Supp. 1990) provides: (1) Where the buyer has accepted goods and given notification (subsection (3) of Section 2-607) [2] [§ 75-2-607] he may recover as damages for any nonconformity of tender the loss resulting in the ordinary course of events from…”

Murray v. Blackwell, 966 So. 2d 901 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-714(2). ¶ 17. The trial court made no finding on these issues and the opinion of the circuit court addressed only the issue of waiver of implied warranties.”

Bryan Constr. Co., Inc. v. Thad Ryan Cadillac, Inc., 300 So. 2d 444 (Miss. 1974). “" Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-714 (1972). Neither of the foregoing remedies under contract of sales permits the recovery of punitive damages.”

C.R. Daniels, Inc. v. Yazoo Mfg. Co., 641 F. Supp. 205 (S.D. Miss. 1986). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-607(3)(a) (1972). “The burden is on the buyer to establish any breach with respect to goods accepted.”

Terri Broome v. Gen. Motors, LLC, 145 So. 3d 645 (Miss. 2014). · cites it 2× “Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-714(2) (Rev. 2012).”

Seaton v. Lawson Chevrolet-Mazda, Inc., 821 S.W.2d 137 (Tenn. 1991). “The court held: The damages available under the UCC include, but are not limited to, compensatory damages under Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-714 (1972) (counterpart to T.”

Mercury Marine Div. v. Clear River ConstructionCo. (Miss. 2001). · cites it 2× “Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-714 (2000). This section provides that “damages for any non-conformity of tender” may be “determined in any manner which is reasonable.”

Fid. Fincl Servs Inc v. Carolyn Randolph (Miss. 1994). · cites it 3× “Fidelity argues that Randolph is entitled to the difference in the value of the car as sold and the value of the car as warranted under Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-714 .(1) However, Damages for breach of the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose…”

— Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-714(2) — 3 cases

George A. MacKenzie v. Chrysler Corp., 607 F.2d 1162 (5th Cir. 1979). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-714(2) (1972) (as amended).”

Terri Broome v. Gen. Motors, LLC, 145 So. 3d 645 (Miss. 2014). “Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-714(2) (Rev. 2012).”

— Miss. Code Ann. § 75-2-714(3) — 1 case

George A. MacKenzie v. Chrysler Corp., 607 F.2d 1162 (5th Cir. 1979). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 75-2-714(2) (1972) (as amended).”

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.