Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...December 28, Kaiser informed FILMO that the ship could not be loaded prior to the December 31 deadline, and “cancelled” the contract. 2 FILMO immediately purchased “cover” DAP pursuant to U.C.C. §§ 2-711 and 2-712, F.S.A. §§ 672.-711 and 672.712 3 for loading on the UEL-EN, but by the time the UELEN reached the loading berth, the International Longshoreman’s Association had instituted a boycott of Soviet vessels and refused to load the UELEN....

...One of these remedies is “cover”: the aggrieved party immediately may purchase substitute goods and recover as damages the difference between the cost of cover and the contract price of the goods plus any incidental or consequential damages. U.C.C. § 2-712, F.S.A. .§ 672.712....

...Melear. Section 672.715 specifically refers to losses that could not be avoided “by cover or otherwise." (emphasis added). While Randall is quite correct that “cover” is a very specific term and refers to the purchase of substitute goods, see § 672.712, that is not the only mitigating option available to a disappointed buyer who wants to preserve his right to consequential damages....

...ns, any finding it might make regarding lost profits must be purely speculative. Since appellee cannot establish past profits, he cannot claim lost profits resulting from appellant's breach. On remand, damages should be determined in accordance with Section 672.712, Florida Statutes (1979): (2) The buyer may recover from the seller as damages the difference between the cost of cover and the contract price together with any incidental or consequential damages ......

...(Better Baked) appeals a judgment holding appellee is not liable to Better Baked as a third party beneficiary of a breached contract between appellee and Goodell. Goodell also appeals, advocating that instead of awarding him only his deposit on the contract, the trial court should have allowed Goodell "cover" under Section 672.712, Florida Statutes (1977)....

...contract and was entitled to return of his down payment with interest. The trial court ruled against Better Baked on the common law theory of third party beneficiary. First, we think Goodell presented an unrebutted prima facie case for "cover" under Section 672.712 which provides: (1) After a breach within the preceding section the buyer may "cover" by making *1089 in good faith and without unreasonable delay any reasonable purchase of or contract to purchase goods in substitution for those due from the seller....

...ed to deduct all or any part of the damages from the price of the 55 doors under section 672.717, Florida Statutes (1979). Adam Metal Supply, Inc. v. Electrodex, Inc., 386 So.2d 1316 (Fla.2d DCA 1980). In computing the measure of damages, we look to section 672.712, Florida Statutes (1979), which allows a buyer to "cover" a breach by purchasing, within a reasonable time and in good faith, substitute goods for those due from the seller....

...Section 672.711(1) provides that: "where the seller fails to make delivery ... the buyer may cancel and: (a) `cover' and have damages under the next section as to all the goods affected whether or not they have been identified to the contract; or (b) recover damages for nondelivery as provided in this chapter (s. 672.713)." Section 672.712 provides for cover. Thus, a buyer complaining of non-delivery can proceed under either §§ 672.712 or 672.713. Section 672.712(1) provides that a "buyer may cover by making in good faith and without reasonable delay any reasonable purchase of or contract to purchase goods in substitution for those due the seller." Section 672.712(2) provides the measure of damages: The buyer may recover from the seller as damages the difference between the cost of cover and the contract price together with any incidental or consequential damages as hereinafter defined (s....

...tract price together with any incidental and any consequential damages provided in this chapter (§ 672.715), but less expenses saved in consequence of the seller's breach." Essentially, both of these remedies involve the same computation, but under § 672.712, the cover price is conclusively determined to be the fair market price of the goods, whereas under § 672.713 the buyer has the burden of proving the market price....

...buyer's remedies to the case at bar, Mayfair's claim is without merit even if SAS breached the Prepaid Rent Agreement. First, Mayfair presented no evidence regarding market price whatsoever, so it cannot seek to recover under § 672.713. That leaves Section 672.712 as the only remedy. Section 672.712(1) requires an effort to purchase substitute goods in good faith and without unreasonable delay. Section 672.712(2) provides that the measure of damages is the difference between the contract price and the cover price, plus incidentals and consequentials....

Iona Lakes job. See Uniform Commercial Code, § 672.712, Fla.Stat. (1987). The Department concedes that

...The appellant, counterplaintiff, sought to offset, against charges admitted due for products received, the amount expended as "cover," following an anticipatory breach of a contract to supply vitamins. The trial court found that a 42 day period was a reasonable time to make "cover." [1] Florida Statute, § 672.712(1) (1983) provides: "(1) After a breach within the preceding section the buyer may `cover' by making in good faith and without unreasonable delay any reasonable purchase of, or contract *1276 to purchase goods in substitution for those due...