Proc 5810 Case Study

331 Words2 Pages
Rush Johnson Farms Inc. v. Missouri Farms Association Procedural history In the case of Rush Johnson Farms Inc. vs Missouri Farms Association, Johnson appealed the decision of the Circuit Court of Chariton Co (MO), that he owed a balance of $4,094.60, which is the balance due for soy beans. The appellate court affirmed the decision of the lower court. Facts Johnson appealed the court’s decision on August 8, 1977 to pay Missouri Farms Association $4,094.60, because it was decided that Johnson was indeed a “merchant” as per the definition in the UCC. Issue Was the farmer was a "merchant" under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 400.2-201? What is the definition of goods? Answer/Holding Yes for both questions. The court relied on chapter 400 of the UCC, section 2-104 for the definition of a merchant which means, a person who deals in goods of the kind or otherwise by his occupation holds himself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the practices or goods involved in the transaction. For goods, chapter 400 of the UCC under section 2-105 defines goods as, all things which are movable at the time of identification to the contract for sale, to include growing crops. Reasoning The court used a number of cases to help decide their decision. In Nelson v. Union Equity Co-op. Exchange, 548 S.W.2d 352 (Texas 1977), that court reached a conclusion the Nelson was a merchant as per the UCC. In that case, the only word that was in question was “deal”, which the definition quoted from Ballentine's Law Dictionary the definition "to buy or to sell." This case is very similar to that of Nelson’s. That is “farming is done for marketing of the crops.” Disposition The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision. References http://www.lexisnexis.com.library3.webster.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/ Uniform Commercial Code, Sixth Edition James J. White and Robert S. Summers., Chapter 2

More about Proc 5810 Case Study

Open Document