AMI 2525 Seller's Damages—Action for the Price

Arkansas Supreme Court Committee On Jury Instructions-Civil

Ark. Model Jury Instr., Civil AMI 2525

Arkansas Model Jury Instructions-Civil

December 2023 Update

Arkansas Supreme Court Committee On Jury Instructions-Civil

Chapter 25. UCC Sales Contracts

AMI 2525 Seller's Damages—Action for the Price

[If you decide for (seller) on the question of (insert particular issue involved)] [If an interrogatory requires you to assess the damages of (seller)] you must then fix the amount of money that will reasonably and fairly compensate [him][her][it] for [any of] the following (number) element(s) of damage:

[(First:) the price of:

((the goods) if they were accepted) (or)

(conforming goods which were lost or destroyed within a commercially reasonable time after risk of their loss passed to (buyer)) (or)

((the goods) if they were identified to the contract and {if (seller) was unable after reasonable effort to resell them at a reasonable price} {or}{the circumstances reasonably indicate that efforts to resell the goods will be unsuccessful}) (and)]

[(Second:) any incidental damages as explained in these instructions.]

Whether [this][either of these] element(s) of damage has been proved by the evidence is for you to determine.

NOTE ON USE

Use this instruction when the seller seeks the price of the goods as his measure of damages. This instruction should be used in conjunction with AMI 2524, since a seller who is not allowed the price may still be entitled to damages for the buyer's non-acceptance under Ark. Code Ann. § 4-2-708.

Use AMI 2527 with this instruction when there is a jury question concerning incidental damages.

COMMENT

This instruction is based on Ark. Code Ann. § 4-2-709. See Unlaub Co., Inc. v. Sexton, 568 F.2d 72 (8th Cir. 1977) (buyer did not reject or attempt to reject the tender; there was opportunity for inspection of the goods, and therefore, seller was entitled to recover the unpaid balance of the contract price under subsection 2-709(1)(a)); Watson v. Miears, 612 F. Supp. 1235 (W.D. Ark. 1984), aff'd, 772 F.2d 433 (8th Cir. 1985) (seller was entitled to recover the unpaid balance of the contract price after an opportunity for inspection of the goods and acceptance of the goods, some of which had been disposed of by buyer).

End of Document