Letter of Credit Litigation under UCC Article 5: A Case of Statutory Preemption

In this article, Professor Dolan maintains that UCC Article 5 fashions a comprehensive remedy scheme for recurring damages claims in letter of credit litigation. That scheme, he contends, is upset by the introduction of most common law causes of action in Article 5 litigation. He concludes, therefore, that courts should not entertain those common law claims, which he sees as destructive of letter of credit law and of the unique commercial nature of letters of credit. Using the economic loss doctrine and similar theories, he urges courts to dismiss actions brought in addition to or in lieu of the remedies Article 5 crafts

Commercial Transactions (1980 Annual Survey of Michigan Law)

As they do each year, Michigan courts decided a number of commercial law cases during the survey period. Several of the cases are significant opinions which either raise questions or carry significant implications for Michigan\u27s commercial lawyers. This survey selects those significant cases, attempts to answer the questions raised, and probes the implications of the decisions

Uniform Commercial Code and the Concept of Possession in the Marketing and Financing of Goods

The buyer in ordinary course rule of section 9-307(1) of the Uniform Commercial Code shelters good faith purchasers of certain goods from the rival claims of sellers\u27 secured creditors. Professor Dolan argues that the Code\u27s refusal to let title determine disputes over goods in other contexts extends to clashes between creditors and buyers under section 9-307(1). Hefinds the key to the Code\u27s scheme for settling these clashes in the special property interest a buyer acquires at the moment goods are identied to a contract of sale. The scheme, he believes, is one ofgeneral respect for reasonable expectations based on possession, the special property interest taking up where those expectations cease. Professor Dolan expounds his interpretation of the Code in reference to a rival interpretation recently adopted by the New York Court of Appeals in Tanbro Fabrics Corp. v. Deering Milliken, Inc

Good Faith Purchase and Warehouse Receipts: Thoughts on the Interplay of Articles 2, 7, and 9 of the UCC

Warehouse receipts have in recent years supplemented their traditional role in the transport and storage of commodities by taking on significant marketing and financing functions. Conflict has inevitably arisen, however, between the financier, for whom the document of title represents a security interest in goods, and the purchaser, for whom such a document represents the right to take delivery of those same goods. The UCC, in Articles 2, 7, and 9, articulates a structure for resolving this confrontation; unfortunately, its logical foundation and operation has been understood and applied by both jurists and practitioners all too infrequently. The author demonstrates the Code\u27s thoughtful orchestration of the doctrine of good-faith purchase and the related theories of estoppel, negotiability, and buyer in ordinary course. He argues that a balance will be struck between the competing interests of lender and buyer only when courts analyze controversies arising out of the use of warehouse receipts in the manner intended by the Code and, in particular, when the doctrine of estoppel is properly applied to documentary transactions