Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

Fla. Stat. § 672.609

Right to adequate assurance of performance

Applied in 3 court decisions — leading case 516 F. App'x 742 - Exim Brickell LLC v. PDVSA Services Inc. (2013)

Most recently applied in 693 F. App'x 810 - Cafaro v. Zois (May 2017)

History.--s. 1, ch. 65-254; s. 594, ch. 97-102

How often courts cite this section

2011201710
citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

(1) A contract for sale imposes an obligation on each party that the other’s expectation of receiving due performance will not be impaired. When reasonable grounds for insecurity arise with respect to the performance of either party the other may in writing demand adequate assurance of due performance and until he or she receives such assurance may if commercially reasonable suspend any performance for which he or she has not already received the agreed return.

(2) Between merchants the reasonableness of grounds for insecurity and the adequacy of any assurance offered shall be determined according to commercial standards.

(3) Acceptance of any improper delivery or payment does not prejudice the aggrieved party’s right to demand adequate assurance of future performance.

(4) After receipt of a justified demand failure to provide within a reasonable time not exceeding 30 days such assurance of due performance as is adequate under the circumstances of the particular case is a repudiation of the contract.

Official source: Online Sunshine (Florida Legislature). Reproduced from public-domain Florida statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.