The seller breaches the warranty of title under this section by delivering a defective certificate of title to the buyer of a motor vehicle. McCoolidge v. Oyvetsky, 292 Neb. 955, 874 N.W.2d 892 (2016).
The seller breaches the warranty of title under this section if there is a substantial cloud or shadow over the title, even if no third party has come forward with a superior claim. McCoolidge v. Oyvetsky, 292 Neb. 955, 874 N.W.2d 892 (2016).
Since contract did not waive warranty by contractor seller that title conveyed to pollution control corporation would be good, contractor seller was liable to it for breach of warranty against liens and encumbrances. Omaha Pollution Control Corp. v. Carver-Greenfield Corp., 413 F.Supp. 1069 (D. Neb. 1976).
Prior Uniform Statutory Provision: Section 13, Uniform Sales Act.
Changes: Completely rewritten, the provisions concerning infringement being new.
Purposes of Changes:
1. Subsection (1) makes provision for a buyer's basic needs in respect to a title which he or she in good faith expects to acquire by his or her purchase, namely, that he or she receive a good, clean title transferred to him or her also in a rightful manner so that he or she will not be exposed to a lawsuit in order to protect it.
The warranty extends to a buyer whether or not the seller was in possession of the goods at the time the sale or contract to sell was made.
The warranty of quiet possession is abolished. Disturbance of quiet possession, although not mentioned specifically, is one way, among many, in which the breach of the warranty of title may be established.
The "knowledge" referred to in subsection (1)(b) is actual knowledge as distinct from notice.
2. The provisions of this article requiring notification to the seller within a reasonable time after the buyer's discovery of a breach apply to notice of a breach of the warranty of title, where the seller's breach was innocent. However, if the seller's breach was in bad faith he or she cannot be permitted to claim that he or she has been misled or prejudiced by the delay in giving notice. In such case the "reasonable" time for notice should receive a very liberal interpretation. Whether the breach by the seller is in good or bad faith section 2-725 provides that the cause of action accrues when the breach occurs. Under the provisions of that section the breach of the warranty of good title occurs when tender of delivery is made since the warranty is not one which extends to "future performance of the goods".
3. When the goods are part of the seller's normal stock and are sold in his or her normal course of business, it is his or her duty to see that no claim of infringement of a patent or trademark by a third party will mar the buyer's title. A sale by a person other than a dealer, however, raises no implication in its circumstances of such a warranty. Nor is there such an implication when the buyer orders goods to be assembled, prepared, or manufactured on his or her own specifications. If, in such a case, the resulting product infringes a patent or trademark, the liability will run from buyer to seller. There is, under such circumstances, a tacit representation on the part of the buyer that the seller will be safe in manufacturing according to the specifications, and the buyer is under an obligation in good faith to indemnify him or her for any loss suffered.
4. This section rejects the cases which recognize the principle that infringements violate the warranty of title but deny the buyer a remedy unless he or she has been expressly prevented from using the goods. Under this article "eviction" is not a necessary condition to the buyer's remedy since the buyer's remedy arises immediately upon receipt of notice of infringement; it is merely one way of establishing the fact of breach.
5. Subsection (2) recognizes that sales by sheriffs, executors, certain foreclosing lienors, and persons similarly situated may be so out of the ordinary commercial course that their peculiar character is immediately apparent to the buyer and therefor no personal obligation is imposed upon the seller who is purporting to sell only an unknown or limited right. This subsection does not touch upon and leaves open all questions of restitution arising in such cases, when a unique article so sold is reclaimed by a third party as the rightful owner.
Foreclosure sales under article 9 are another matter. Section 9-610 provides that a disposition of collateral under that section includes warranties such as those imposed by this section on a voluntary disposition of property of the kind involved. Consequently, unless properly excluded under subsection (2) or under the special provisions for exclusion in section 9-610, a disposition under section 9-610 of collateral consisting of goods includes the warranties imposed by subsection (1) and, if applicable, subsection (3).
6. The warranty of subsection (1) is not designated as an "implied" warranty, and hence is not subject to section 2-316(3). Disclaimer of the warranty of title is governed instead by subsection (2), which requires either specific language or the described circumstances.
Point 1: Section 2-403.
Point 2: Sections 2-607 and 2-725.
Point 3: Section 1-203.
Point 4: Sections 2-609 and 2-725.
Point 6: Section 2-316.
Definitional Cross References:
"Buyer". Section 2-103.
"Contract for sale". Section 2-106.
"Goods". Section 2-105.
"Person". Section 1-201.
"Right". Section 1-201.
"Seller". Section 2-103.