|
|
|
|
|
by gamblor956
2961 days ago
|
|
Guys, the UCC isn't the only law that applies to the situation... Ed might not have rights under the UCC, assuming it applied to the transaction, which is questionable since Ed does not appear to be a merchant. He would have rights under state laws that override the provisions of the UCC. [Edit] Most states actually override this provision of the UCC to define entrusting narrowly. See, e.g, California's provision: 3) “Entrusting” includes any delivery and any acquiescence in retention of possession for the purpose of sale, obtaining offers to purchase, locating a buyer, or the like; regardless of any condition expressed between the parties to the delivery or acquiescence and regardless of whether the procurement of the entrusting or the possessor's disposition of the goods have been such as to be larcenous under the criminal law. |
|