TRY ME!
Contract Terms And Ucc
Summary
Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Article 2-207, when one or both parties are not merchants, additional terms in an acceptance are considered proposals for additions to the contract and do not automatically become part of the contract unless the offeror explicitly agrees to them. In the case of Sandy and Whirlpool, since both parties are not merchants, the additional term does not automatically become part of the contract. Jansen Stores, facing a contract repudiation by Bender Manufacturing, can cover by procuring the goods elsewhere and recovering any damages. Specific performance is an option if the goods are unique or irreplaceable.Full Conversation
Did Whirlpool's acceptance form a contract between Sandy and Whirlpool?
Yes, under Article II of the UCC, a definite unconditional acceptance may form a contract even if it proposes an additional term. The additional term becomes part of the contract unless it materially alters the original offer, which would require Sandy's explicit agreement.
Are you seeking to enforce the original terms of your order, or are you disputing the additional term added by Whirlpool?
Are you seeking to enforce the original terms of your order, or are you disputing the additional term added by Whirlpool?
For this question only, assume that a contract is formed, was the additional term in the acceptance part of the contract?
Under Article II of the UCC, a definite and unconditional acceptance can form a contract even if it includes additional terms. Since Sandy did not object to the additional term, it generally becomes part of the contract unless it materially alters the original offer. In this case, it appears the additional term is part of the contract.
Are you looking to challenge this additional term?
Are you looking to challenge this additional term?
For this question only, assume that a contract is formed, was the additional term in the acceptance part of the contract?
In this scenario, assuming the contract is formed, the additional term in Whirlpool's acceptance becomes part of the contract under Article II of the UCC unless it materially alters the original offer. Since Sandy did not object to the additional term, it is likely included in the contract.
Do you need more information about how to proceed with disputing the additional term?
Do you need more information about how to proceed with disputing the additional term?
For this question only, assume that a contract is formed, was the additional term in the acceptance part of the contract?
Group of answer choices
No, because between merchants, the additional term does not become part of the contract unless the offeror agrees to it.
No, because both parties are not merchants.
No, because both parties, the additional term is not part of the contract unless the offeror agrees to it.
No, because both parties are not merchants, the additional term can not be part of the contract unless supported by consideration.
No, because both parties are not merchants.
According to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Article *-*, when one or both parties are not merchants, additional terms in an acceptance are considered proposals for additions to the contract and do not automatically become part of the contract unless the offeror explicitly agrees to them. Would you like to understand more about how this applies to your situation?
According to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Article *-*, when one or both parties are not merchants, additional terms in an acceptance are considered proposals for additions to the contract and do not automatically become part of the contract unless the offeror explicitly agrees to them. Would you like to understand more about how this applies to your situation?
Bender Manufacturing repudiated its contract to sell * computers to Jansen Stores, Inc. What recourse does Jansen Stores have?
Group of answer choices
It can obtain specific performance by the seller.
It can recover punitive damages.
It must await seller's performance for a commercially reasonable time after repudiation is it wishes to recover anything.
It can cover, that is procure the goods elsewhere, and recover any damages.
Jansen Stores has the right to "cover," which means procuring the goods elsewhere and recovering any damages that arise from the repudiation. This is generally the most practical and legally supported option under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) in California.
Would you like to know more about the process of covering and recovering damages?
Would you like to know more about the process of covering and recovering damages?
Bender Manufacturing repudiated its contract to sell * computers to Jansen Stores, Inc. What recourse does Jansen Stores have?
Hey! Jansen Stores has a few options in this situation under California law:
- Cover: Jansen can purchase the computers from another supplier and then claim the difference in price as damages from Bender Manufacturing.
- Specific Performance: If the computers are unique or irreplaceable, Jansen may seek a court order for Bender to fulfill the contract.
- Await Performance: They can wait for a commercially reasonable time and then seek damages.
What do you think makes the most sense for Jansen Stores?
- Cover: Jansen can purchase the computers from another supplier and then claim the difference in price as damages from Bender Manufacturing.
- Specific Performance: If the computers are unique or irreplaceable, Jansen may seek a court order for Bender to fulfill the contract.
- Await Performance: They can wait for a commercially reasonable time and then seek damages.
What do you think makes the most sense for Jansen Stores?
So which one of these:
It can obtain specific performance by the seller.
It can recover punitive damages.
It must await seller's performance for a commercially reasonable time after repudiation is it wishes to recover anything.
It can cover, that is procure the goods elsewhere, and recover any damages.
In this scenario, Jansen Stores can:
- Cover: Procure the goods elsewhere and recover any damages.
- Specific Performance: Obtain specific performance by the seller if the goods are unique or irreplaceable.
Would you like more details on any of these options?
- Cover: Procure the goods elsewhere and recover any damages.
- Specific Performance: Obtain specific performance by the seller if the goods are unique or irreplaceable.
Would you like more details on any of these options?
Between those * which one is the correct answer to this question
The correct answer is:
Yes, under Article II of the UCC, a definite unconditional acceptance may form a contract even if it proposes an additional term.
In California, under the UCC, the additional term becomes part of the contract unless it materially alters the original offer, which would require Sandy's explicit agreement.
Do you have more questions or need further clarification on this topic?
Yes, under Article II of the UCC, a definite unconditional acceptance may form a contract even if it proposes an additional term.
In California, under the UCC, the additional term becomes part of the contract unless it materially alters the original offer, which would require Sandy's explicit agreement.
Do you have more questions or need further clarification on this topic?
Between those * which one is the correct answer to this question
Hey! The correct answer to the first question, "Did Whirlpool's acceptance form a contract between Sandy and Whirlpool?" is:
Yes, under Article II of the UCC, a definite unconditional acceptance may form a contract even if it proposes an additional term.
Would you like more information on how to proceed if you are disputing the additional term added by Whirlpool?
Yes, under Article II of the UCC, a definite unconditional acceptance may form a contract even if it proposes an additional term.
Would you like more information on how to proceed if you are disputing the additional term added by Whirlpool?
Start a new chat