Sales and Leases | 139
substitute tables any faster. During the four weeks, the owner and the manufacturer discussed replacing the defective tables. After talks broke down, the owner continued using the tables for another six months. On similar facts, a state appellate court found that the owner accepted the tables. Using them for the initial four weeks may have been a reasonable attempt to mitigate damages arising from the defective tables. But the additional six months’ retention and use were unreasonable and clearly not consistent with the manufacturer’s continued ownership. [ See Selected Furniture, LLC v. Georgia’s Restaurant and Pancake House, Inc. , No. 1–14–1794, 2015 WL 4039441 (Ill. App. Ct. June 30, 2015).] Resale, Use, and Possession as Inconsistent with the Seller’s Ownership In general, courts seem to hold that reselling the product is inconsistent with the seller’s ownership. Even so, some cases hold that resale is not inconsistent with the seller’s ownership if, at the time of resale, the buyer (1) did not know the goods were defective and (2) had not had a reasonable opportunity to inspect the goods. Similarly, though the buyer’s use and possession of the goods are often found inconsistent with the seller’s ownership, it is not inconsistent with the seller’s ownership for the buyer to use the goods as necessary for inspection, troubleshooting, and so on. [ See Norsal Exports, Ltd. v. Synergy Microwave Corp. , No. 19050/03, 2004 WL 1797560 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. Aug. 4, 2004); 2 Hawkland UCC Series § 2-606:4, Westlaw (database updated June 2021).] Acts Required or Authorized by Article 2 as Not Inconsistent with Seller’s Ownership In connection with a rejection of goods, or else to mitigate damages arising from the seller’s breach, Article 2 authorizes or requires the buyer to take various steps. These acts, by themselves, are not acts inconsistent with the seller’s ownership and, hence, do not give rise to acceptance (or to conversion of the goods). [ See 2 Hawkland UCC Series § 2-606:4, Westlaw (database updated June 2021).]
2. Effects of Acceptance Section 2-607 lists a few of the effects of the buyer’s acceptance of goods.
a. Acceptance as Triggering the Buyer’s Obligation to Pay at the Contract Rate for Goods Accepted The buyer must pay the contract rate for any goods she accepts. Of course, as mentioned, if a delivery is nonconforming, the buyer may accept some commercial units and reject the rest. If the buyer accepts only some commercial units, then she need only pay for those accepted, and the contract price will be duly apportioned. What is more, the buyer must
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker