Establishing Breach After Acceptance; Notice of Claim or Litigation to Person Answerable Over. (1) The buyer must pay at the contract rate for any goods accepted. (2) Acceptance of goods by the buyer precludes rejection of the goods accepted and if made with knowledge of a nonconformity cannot be revoked because of it unless the acceptance was on the reasonable assumption that the nonconformity would be seasonably cured but acceptance does not of itself impair any other remedy provided by this article for nonconformity. (3) Where a tender has been accepted (a) the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify the seller of breach or be barred from any remedy; and (b) if the claim is one for infringement or the like (subsection (3) of Section 2-312) and the buyer is sued as a result of such a breach he must so notify the seller within a reasonable time after he receives notice of the litigation or be barred from any remedy over for liability established by the litigation. (4) The burden is on the buyer to establish any breach with respect to the goods accepted. (5) Where the buyer is sued for breach of a warranty or other obligation for which his seller is answerable over (a) he may give his seller written notice of the litigation. If the notice states that the seller may come in and defend and that if the seller does not do so he will be bound in any action against him by his buyer by any determination of fact common to the two litigations, then unless the seller after seasonable receipt of the notice does come in and defend he is so bound. (b) if the claim is one for infringement or the like (subsection (3) of Section 2-312) the original seller may demand in writing that his buyer turn over to him control of the litigation including settlement or else be barred from any remedy over and if he also agrees to bear all expense and to satisfy any adverse judgment, then unless the buyer after seasonable receipt of the demand does turn over control the buyer is so barred. (6) The provisions of subsections (3), (4) and (5) apply to any obligation of a buyer to hold the seller harmless against infringement or the like (subsection (3) (b) of Section 2-312). Added by Laws 1961, p. 93, § 2-607.
Notes of Decisions
Cmi Corp. v. Leemar Steel Co., 733 F.2d 1410 (10th Cir. 1984).
· cites it 3× “Okla.Stat.Ann. tit. 12A, § 2-607. Our holding that the district court erred in finding that CMI had rejected the goods does not necessitate a reversal.”
Sisemore v. Dolgencorp, LLC, 212 F. Supp. 3d 1106 (N.D. Okla. 2016).
“Second, Dollar General argues the Complaint fails to allege Sisemore provided notice of the alleged defect in the motor oil “within a reasonable time,” as required under Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 2-607(3)(a). In response, Sisemore argues he provided notice by filing this lawsuit,…”
Darrow v. Spencer, 581 P.2d 1309 (Okla. 1978).
“See 12A O.S. §§ 2-607 and 2-608. Appellant argues that such notice within a reasonable time was not given.”
Daugherty v. Farmers Coop. Ass'n, 790 P.2d 1118 (Okla. Civ. App. 1989).
“Appellee filed a motion for summary judgment arguing lack of notice under the UCC, 12A O.S.1981 § 2-607(3)(a). That section provides: (3) Where a tender has been accepted (a) the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify…”
Larrance Tank Corp. v. Burrough, 476 P.2d 346 (Okla. 1970).
“1961, § 2-607(3) (a), which provides as follows: “(3) Where a tender has been accepted (a) the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify the seller of breach or be barred from any remedy; and” No other authorities are…”
W. Paper Co. v. Bilby, 783 P.2d 980 (Okla. Civ. App. 1989).
“Title 12A O.S.1981 § 2-607(2), provides that although acceptance of the goods “precludes rejection” and may preclude revocation of acceptance, such “acceptance does not of itself impair any other remedy provided” for nonconforming goods.”
Davis v. Pumpco, Inc., 519 P.2d 557 (Okla. Civ. App. 1974).
“The position of appellee is based upon 12A O.S.1971 § 2-607(3) (a) which clearly states that where a tender has been accepted the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach, notify the seller of the breach or be barred from any…”
Mounts v. Parker, 727 P.2d 594 (Okla. 1986).
“Wood, 7 deals with 12A O.S.1981 § 2-607(3)(a), a provision in our own commercial code requiring notice of breach of warranty in a situation involving the sale of goods.”
Wooten v. Motorola Commc'ns & Elec., Inc., 488 P.2d 1284 (Okla. 1971).
“Title 12A O.S.1961, § 2-607 provides in pertinent part: “Effect of Acceptance; Notice of Breach; Burden of Establishing Breach After Acceptance; * * * (1) The buyer must pay at the contract rate for any goods accepted.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 2-607(2): 1 case
W. Paper Co. v. Bilby, 783 P.2d 980 (Okla. Civ. App. 1989).
“Title 12A O.S.1981 § 2-607(2), provides that although acceptance of the goods “precludes rejection” and may preclude revocation of acceptance, such “acceptance does not of itself impair any other remedy provided” for nonconforming goods.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 2-607(3): 2 cases
Larrance Tank Corp. v. Burrough, 476 P.2d 346 (Okla. 1970).
“1961, § 2-607(3) (a), which provides as follows: “(3) Where a tender has been accepted (a) the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify the seller of breach or be barred from any remedy; and” No other authorities are…”
Davis v. Pumpco, Inc., 519 P.2d 557 (Okla. Civ. App. 1974).
“The position of appellee is based upon 12A O.S.1971 § 2-607(3) (a) which clearly states that where a tender has been accepted the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach, notify the seller of the breach or be barred from any…”
Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 2-607(3)(a): 3 cases
Sisemore v. Dolgencorp, LLC, 212 F. Supp. 3d 1106 (N.D. Okla. 2016).
“Second, Dollar General argues the Complaint fails to allege Sisemore provided notice of the alleged defect in the motor oil “within a reasonable time,” as required under Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 2-607(3)(a). In response, Sisemore argues he provided notice by filing this lawsuit,…”
Daugherty v. Farmers Coop. Ass'n, 790 P.2d 1118 (Okla. Civ. App. 1989).
“Appellee filed a motion for summary judgment arguing lack of notice under the UCC, 12A O.S.1981 § 2-607(3)(a). That section provides: (3) Where a tender has been accepted (a) the buyer must within a reasonable time after he discovers or should have discovered any breach notify…”
Mounts v. Parker, 727 P.2d 594 (Okla. 1986).
“Wood, 7 deals with 12A O.S.1981 § 2-607(3)(a), a provision in our own commercial code requiring notice of breach of warranty in a situation involving the sale of goods.”
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.