Wis. Stat. § 401.103
Construction of uniform commercial code to promote its purposes and policies; applicability of supplemental principles of law
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
401.103401.103 Construction of uniform commercial code to promote its purposes and policies; applicability of supplemental principles of law.
401.103(1)(1) Chapters 401 to 411 must be liberally construed and applied to promote its underlying purposes and policies, which are all of the following:
401.103(1)(b)(b) To permit the continued expansion of commercial practices through custom, usage, and agreement of the parties.
401.103(2)(2) Unless displaced by the particular provisions of chs. 401 to 411, the principles of law and equity, including the law merchant and the law relative to capacity to contract, principal and agent, estoppel, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, bankruptcy, or other validating or invalidating cause shall supplement its provisions.
401.103 AnnotationBecause, under sub. (1) (c), one underlying purpose of Wisconsin’s Uniform Commercial Code is to make uniform the law among the various jurisdictions, Wisconsin courts give substantial weight to cases from other jurisdictions when resolving issues that arise under that code. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Wuensch, 2018 WI 35, 380 Wis. 2d 727, 911 N.W.2d 1, 15-0175.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2024 · leading case: Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Thomas P. Wuensch
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Thomas P. Wuensch (2018)
“Wis. Stat. § 401.103 (2) ("Unless displaced by the particular provisions of chs.”
Associated Bank N.A. v. Jack W. Collier (2014)
“" Wis. Stat. § 401.103 (1)(a). ¶50 Chapter 409 governs secured transactions and works toward these stated goals by prescribing the steps a party must take to obtain and perfect a security interest in personal property.”
Attorney's Title Guaranty Fund, Inc. v. Town Bank (2014)
“" 1 Julian B. McDonnell, Secured Transactions Under the Uniform Commercial Code: Article 9 and the Security Controversy, § 1.”
Korhumel Steel Corp. v. Wandler (1999)
“402(3) shields the representative from liability in an action for fraud when such actions are expressly preserved by §401.103, Stats. 3 We conclude that it does not.”
Weber, Leicht, Gohr & Associates v. Liberty Bank (2000)
“401 to 411 the principles of law and equity, including the law merchant and the law relative to capacity to contract, principal and agent, estoppel, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, bankruptcy, or other validating or invalidating cause shall supplement its…”
Christensen v. Equity Cooperative Livestock Sale Ass'n (1986)
“, 2 for the proposition that because language of the contract prevails over usage of trade, course of dealing, and course of performance between the parties, Christensen’s conduct was irrelevant.”
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Van Kylen (In Re Van Kylen) (1989)
“§ 401.103 (1987-88) ("Unless displaced by the particular provisions of chs.”
Co-Operative v. Kellogg-Citizens National Bank (1986)
“Section 401.103, Stats. Where the rights of innocent third persons are not involved, there is no overpowering reason to compel a bank to pay its cashier's check without regard to defenses.”
Wisconsin Bankers Ass'n v. Mutual Savings & Loan Ass'n (1978)
“…Greater Arizona Savings and Loan Ass’n., 103 Ariz. 166 , 438 P.2d 403, 405 (1968). 30 Sec. 401.102(2) (b), Stats. 31 Sec. 401.103, Stats.”
Koehring Co. v. Glowacki (1977)
“If, however, they are terms which would not so change the bargain they will be incorporated unless notice of objection to thorn has already been given or is given within a reasonable time.”
Met-Al, Inc. v. Hansen Storage Co. (1994)
“§ 401.103 (West 1964). In adopting this presumption, the UCC drafters intended “the continued applicability to commercial contracts of all supplemental bodies of laio except insofar as they are explicitly displaced by this Act.”
Matter of J & L Transport, Inc. (1986)
“J & L argues that the combined effect of clauses 10 and 17 render option “c” unconscionable because, literally read, option “c” would require J & L to pay the total of all unpaid rents plus the market value of the trailers prior to the loss plus, under clause 17, to restore the…”
— Wis. Stat. § 401.103(2) — 1 case
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.