Nebraska Uniform Commercial Code 2-204

UCC 2-204


Formation in general.

(1) A contract for sale of goods may be made in any manner sufficient to show agreement, including conduct by both parties which recognizes the existence of such a contract.

(2) An agreement sufficient to constitute a contract for sale may be found even though the moment of its making is undetermined.

(3) Even though one or more terms are left open a contract for sale does not fail for indefiniteness if the parties have intended to make a contract and there is a reasonably certain basis for giving an appropriate remedy.


  • Laws 1963, c. 544, Art. II, § 2-204, p. 1713.


  • The parties' conduct indicated that a contract existed when the offeror made an oral offer which was later confirmed in a written proposal, submitted information and shop drawings to the offeree, corresponded several times with the offeree about variance approval, and visited the offeree's office almost 5 months after the alleged agreement was made. A contract does not fail for indefiniteness if the parties' conduct indicated that the parties intended to make a contract and the offer letter satisfied the quantity requirement of the U.C.C. Nebraska Builders Prod. Co. v. Industrial Erectors, 239 Neb. 744, 478 N.W.2d 257 (1992).

  • A contract for sale of goods may be made in any manner sufficient to show agreement, including conduct of parties which recognizes its existence. Crane Co. v. Roberts Supply Co., 196 Neb. 67, 241 N.W.2d 516 (1976).


  • Prior Uniform Statutory Provision: Sections 1 and 3, Uniform Sales Act.

  • Changes: Completely rewritten by this and other sections of this article.

  • Purposes of Changes:

  • Subsection (1) continues without change the basic policy of recognizing any manner of expression of agreement, oral, written or otherwise. The legal effect of such an agreement is, of course, qualified by other provisions of this article.

  • Under subsection (1) appropriate conduct by the parties may be sufficient to establish an agreement. Subsection (2) is directed primarily to the situation where the interchanged correspondence does not disclose the exact point at which the deal was closed, but the actions of the parties indicate that a binding obligation has been undertaken.

  • Subsection (3) states the principle as to "open terms" underlying later sections of the article. If the parties intend to enter into a binding agreement, this subsection recognizes that agreement as valid in law, despite missing terms, if there is any reasonably certain basis for granting a remedy. The test is not certainty as to what the parties were to do nor as to the exact amount of damages due the plaintiff. Nor is the fact that one or more terms are left to be agreed upon enough of itself to defeat an otherwise adequate agreement. Rather, commercial standards on the point of "indefiniteness" are intended to be applied, the code making provision elsewhere for missing terms needed for performance, open price, remedies, and the like.

  • The more terms the parties leave open, the less likely it is that they have intended to conclude a binding agreement, but their actions may be frequently conclusive on the matter despite the omissions.

  • Cross References:

  • Subsection (1): Sections 1-103, 2-201, and 2-302.

  • Subsection (2): Sections 2-205 through 2-209.

  • Subsection (3): See part 3.

  • Definitional Cross References:

  • "Agreement". Section 1-201.

  • "Contract". Section 1-201.

  • "Contract for sale". Section 2-106.

  • "Goods". Section 2-105.

  • "Party". Section 1-201.

  • "Remedy". Section 1-201.

  • "Term". Section 1-201.