Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-2-101 (2026)
Short title
✓ current as of May 2026
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as Uniform Commercial Code - Sales.
Acts 1963, ch. 81, § 1 (2-101).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case: Audio Visual Artistry v. Stephen Tanzer, 403 S.W.3d 789 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012).
Audio Visual Artistry v. Stephen Tanzer, 403 S.W.3d 789 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012). “Therein, the court states, in relevant part, that: [T]he Court finds that the parties’ agreement in this matter involved the sale of consumer goods governed by the Uniform Commercial Code found at T.C.A. § 47-2-101 et seq. Although the parties’ agreement involved some provision…”
Haverlah v. Memphis Aviation, Inc., 674 S.W.2d 297 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1984). “The sale of the aircraft in this case is a “transaction in goods” and therefore is controlled by the Uniform Commercial Code, Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-2-101 et seq. Tenn.Code Ann.”
Hudson v. Town & Country True Value Hardware, Inc., 666 S.W.2d 51 (Tenn. 1984). “Plaintiff, as seller, and defendant, as purchaser, entered into two separate contracts, one for the sale of real estate at $227,500 and the other for the sale of stock and fixtures of the business known as Hudson Hardware for $60,000.”
Amacher v. Brown-Forman Corp., 826 S.W.2d 480 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-2-101, et seq. In its general provisions, the U.”
Arcata Graphics Co. v. Heidelberg Harris, Inc., 874 S.W.2d 15 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1993). “Section 47-2-101 et seq., permits the limitation on remedies agreed to by Harris and Hawkins.”
North Georgia Toyota v. Jahn (In Re Tom Woods Used Cars, Inc.), 24 B.R. 529 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1982). “Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 47-2-101— 2-725. In March, 1981, North Georgia Toyota delivered the car to Tom Woods under a contract of sale.”
Olin Corp. v. Lambda Elec., Inc., 39 F. Supp. 2d 912 (E.D. Tenn. 1998). “Code Am §§ 47-18-101 — 1604, as well as its claims under the Tennessee adaptation of the Uniform COMMERCIAL Code, Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 47-2-101 — 725, remain for trial.”
Upperline Equip. Co. v. J & M, Inc., 724 F. Supp. 2d 883 (E.D. Tenn. 2009). “See Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 47-2-101, et seq.; id. §§ 47-2-201 to -210.”
Metro. Dev. & Hous. Agency v. Brown Stove Works, Inc., 637 S.W.2d 876 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1982). “Rather, on July 15,1981, MDHA brought suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County against Brown Stove “seeking remedies pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code, Tennessee Code Annotated, §§ 47-2-101 et seq.; for recission of a contract; and for tortious misrepresentation.”
Rollins v. Cherokee Warehouses, Inc., 635 F. Supp. 136 (E.D. Tenn. 1986). “The provisions of the first sentence of this subsection shall not apply to: "(1) Actions based upon a breach of warranty, express or implied, as defined by § 47-2-101 et seq.; or "(2) Actions where the manufacturer of the product or part in question shall not be subject to…”
Carbon Processing & Reclamation, LLC v. Valero Mktg. & Supply Co., 694 F. Supp. 2d 888 (W.D. Tenn. 2010). “§ 47-2-101 et seq. Furthermore, the dealings between the parties were dealings between merchants as defined in Tenn.”
Paskell v. Nobility Homes, Inc., 871 S.W.2d 481 (Tenn. 1994). “Although a mobile home in Tennessee is treated as real property for the purposes of tax assessment, a transaction involving the sale of a mobile home is considered the sale of personal property and is subject to the terms and conditions found in the Uniform Commercial Code.”
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.