06.09.2021 Views

American Contract Law for a Global Age, 2017a

American Contract Law for a Global Age, 2017a

American Contract Law for a Global Age, 2017a

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

treated the sale of clay as a transaction “in goods.” “Goods” are defined in UCC § 2-<br />

105 as<br />

all things (including specially manufactured goods) which are movable<br />

at the time of identification to the contract <strong>for</strong> sale other than the money<br />

in which the price is to be paid, investment securities (Article 8) and<br />

things in action. “Goods” also includes the unborn young of animals and<br />

growing crops and other identified things attached to realty as described<br />

in the section on goods to be severed from realty (section 2-107).<br />

The term “movable” is somewhat elusive in that virtually anything is movable, even<br />

Blackacre, “in the sense that much of the dirt, gravel, water, and minerals that<br />

comprise the ‘things’ called Blackacre can be transported to another location.”<br />

ROBERT J. NORDSTROM, HANDBOOK OF THE LAW OF SALES § 22, at 45 (1970). However,<br />

movable is modified by “at the time of identification,” and there is further reference<br />

to growing crops which can be severed. Considered as a whole, “the words of section<br />

2-105 lose much of their obscurity. The drafters were concerned with items of tangible<br />

property which were portable at the time they were set aside <strong>for</strong> their transfer, items<br />

which normally flow in commerce.” Id. at 46. 2<br />

Indicative of the variety of items which may be classified as goods within the<br />

meaning of section 2-105 are hoghouses, electricity, mobile homes, growing crops,<br />

tomato seeds, and modular homes. See Thompson Farms, Inc. v. Corno Feed Products,<br />

366 N.E.2d 3 (Ind. Ct. App. 1977); Helvey v. Wabash County REMC, 176, 278 N.E.2d<br />

608 (Ind. Ct. App. 1972); Jones v. Abriani, 350 N.E.2d 635 (Ind. Ct. App. 1976);<br />

Sebasty v. Perschke, 404 N.E.2d 1200 (Ind. Ct. App. 1980); Stumler v. Ferry-Morse<br />

Seed Co., 644 F.2d 667 (7th Cir. 1981); Stephenson v. Frazier, 399 N.E.2d 794 (Ind.<br />

Ct. App. 1980). None of these seem similar to the sale of several feet of clay soil lying<br />

four feet beneath the surface of the earth.<br />

There is another section which should be read with § 2-105, to-wit, § 2-107.<br />

Section 2-107 provides in part:<br />

(1) A contract <strong>for</strong> the sale of timber, minerals or the like or a structure<br />

or its materials to be removed from realty is a contract <strong>for</strong> the sale of<br />

goods within this Article if they are to be severed by the seller but until<br />

severance a purported present sale thereof which is not effective as a<br />

transfer of an interest in land is effective only as a contract to sell.<br />

(2) A contract <strong>for</strong> the sale apart from the land of growing crops or other<br />

things attached to realty and capable of severance without material<br />

harm thereto but not described in subsection (1) is a contract <strong>for</strong> the sale<br />

2 [By the Court:] The comment to 2-105, explains that growing crops are goods because “they are<br />

frequently intended <strong>for</strong> sale.”<br />

______________________________________________________________________________<br />

UNIT 10: UCC SCOPE AND FORMATION 179

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!