Wis. Stat. » CHAPTER 401 — UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE — GENERAL PROVISIONS
Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 401.205 (2026)

Reasonable time; seasonableness

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
401.205401.205 Reasonable time; seasonableness.
401.205(1)(1) Whether a time for taking an action required by chs. 401 to 411 is reasonable depends on the nature, purpose, and circumstances of the action.
401.205(2)(2) An action is taken seasonably if it is taken at or within the time agreed or, if no time is agreed, at or within a reasonable time.
401.205 HistoryHistory: 2009 a. 320.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: Royster-Clark, Inc. v. Olsen's Mill, Inc., 2006 WI 46 (Wis. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Royster-Clark, Inc. v. Olsen's Mill, Inc., 2006 WI 46 (Wis. 2006). · cites it 4× “" Wis. Stat. § 401.205 (1). While not conclusive on this point, the long-standing relationship between both the individuals and the companies supported a strong inference that the circuit court could use in finding that strict formalities concerning contracts and modifications…”
Rich Prods. Corp. v. Kemutec, Inc., 66 F. Supp. 2d 937 (E.D. Wis. 1999). · cites it 6× “2d at 1449-1452 ; see also, Wis.Stat. § 401.205. 20 Accordingly, sufficient evidence of the relevant trade usage or course of dealing would preclude summary judgment on Kemutec’s UCC defenses.”
Schaller v. Marine Nat'l Bank of Neenah, 388 N.W.2d 645 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 8× “" Official UCC Comment 2 to Wis. Stat. Ann. § 401.205 (West 1964), states that "[c]ourse of dealing under subsection (1) is restricted, literally, to a sequence of conduct between the parties previous to the agreement.”
Novelly Oil Co. v. Mathy Constr. Co., 433 N.W.2d 628 (Wis. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “I do not suggest reliance on a "course of performance." The crucial question in this case involves a usage of trade—responsibility to nominate a barge—which can be shown without proof of a prior course of dealing.”
Dresser Indus., Inc., Waukesha Engine Div. v. The Gradall Co., 965 F.2d 1442 (7th Cir. 1992). “208), it became part of the contract as a result of the parties’ course of performance (§ 2-208), course of dealing (§ 1-205), and usage of trade (§ 1-205).”
Fleming Companies, Inc. v. Krist Oil Co., 324 F. Supp. 2d 933 (W.D. Wis. 2004). · cites it 2× “” Wis. Stat. § 401.205 (2). Because defendant has proposed no facts regarding any such regular practice or method or indicated in its brief which if any of the services were industry standards, I will disregard its reference to usage of trade as a source of contractual terms.”
Christensen v. Equity Coop. Livestock Sale Ass'n, 396 N.W.2d 762 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “, provides: The express terms of an agreement and an applicable course of dealing or usage of trade shall be construed wherever reasonable as consistent with each other; but when such construction is unreasonable express terms control both course of dealing and usage of trade…”
All. Laundry Sys., LLC v. Thyssenkrupp Materials, NA, 570 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (E.D. Wis. 2008). · cites it 2× “See Wis. Stat. § 401.205 (3) (stating that a course of dealing “give[s] particular meaning to and supplement[s] or qualifies] terms of an agreement”).”
Employers Ins. Co. of Wausau v. THE MARLEY CO., 461 F. Supp. 2d 879 (W.D. Wis. 2006). · cites it 6× “Plaintiff contends that the court should consider the parties’ course of dealing and the common trade usage of “allocated loss adjustment expenses” under Wis. Stat. § 401.205 , which provides that “a course of dealing between parties and any usage of trade in the vocation or…”
Mar.-Ontario Freight Lines, Ltd. v. STI Holdings, Inc., 481 F. Supp. 2d 963 (W.D. Wis. 2007). · cites it 6× ““Course of dealing” is defined under Wis Stat. § 401.205 in relevant part as follows: (1) A course of dealing is a sequence of previous conduct between the parties to a particular transaction which is fairly to be regarded as establishing a common basis of understanding for…”
Hydraulics Int'l Inc v. Amalga Composites Inc (E.D. Wis. 2020). “208) and course of dealing and usage of trade (§ 401.205).” Dresser Indus., Inc., Waukesha Engine Div.”
Buddy's Plant Plus Corp. v. Viking Masek Global Packaging Tech., LLC (Wis. Ct. App. 2025). “§ 401.205(1). Here, we are focused on the refund remedy, which involved a return of Buddy’s money in the event Viking was unable to provide the stick pack machine.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Wis. Stat. § 401.205(1) — 4 cases
Rich Prods. Corp. v. Kemutec, Inc., 66 F. Supp. 2d 937 (E.D. Wis. 1999). “2d at 1449-1452 ; see also, Wis.Stat. § 401.205. 20 Accordingly, sufficient evidence of the relevant trade usage or course of dealing would preclude summary judgment on Kemutec’s UCC defenses.”
Schaller v. Marine Nat'l Bank of Neenah, 388 N.W.2d 645 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986). “" Official UCC Comment 2 to Wis. Stat. Ann. § 401.205 (West 1964), states that "[c]ourse of dealing under subsection (1) is restricted, literally, to a sequence of conduct between the parties previous to the agreement.”
Employers Ins. Co. of Wausau v. THE MARLEY CO., 461 F. Supp. 2d 879 (W.D. Wis. 2006). “Plaintiff contends that the court should consider the parties’ course of dealing and the common trade usage of “allocated loss adjustment expenses” under Wis. Stat. § 401.205 , which provides that “a course of dealing between parties and any usage of trade in the vocation or…”
Buddy's Plant Plus Corp. v. Viking Masek Global Packaging Tech., LLC (Wis. Ct. App. 2025). “§ 401.205(1). Here, we are focused on the refund remedy, which involved a return of Buddy’s money in the event Viking was unable to provide the stick pack machine.”
— Wis. Stat. § 401.205(3) — 1 case
Schaller v. Marine Nat'l Bank of Neenah, 388 N.W.2d 645 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986). “" Official UCC Comment 2 to Wis. Stat. Ann. § 401.205 (West 1964), states that "[c]ourse of dealing under subsection (1) is restricted, literally, to a sequence of conduct between the parties previous to the agreement.”
— Wis. Stat. § 401.205(4) — 1 case
Christensen v. Equity Coop. Livestock Sale Ass'n, 396 N.W.2d 762 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986). “, provides: The express terms of an agreement and an applicable course of dealing or usage of trade shall be construed wherever reasonable as consistent with each other; but when such construction is unreasonable express terms control both course of dealing and usage of trade…”
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.