Delaney, Richard P

Nevins Jr, Albert E

Weldon Jr, Walter F

Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School

Boston College Law ReviewVolume 2 | Issue 2 Article 104-1-1961Article 6: Bulk TransfersWalter F. Weldon JrAlbert E. Nevins JrRichard P. DelaneyFollow this and additional works at: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclrPart of the Commercial Law CommonsThis Uniform Commercial Code Commentary is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ Boston CollegeLaw School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Boston CollegeLaw School. For more information, please contact nick.szydlowski@bc.edu.Recommended CitationWalter F. Weldon Jr, Albert E. Nevins Jr, and Richard P. Delaney, Article 6: Bulk Transfers, 2 B.C.L.Rev. 348 (1961), http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr/vol2/iss2/10BOSTON COLLEGE INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL LAW REVIEWwho received the check by negotiation and for value, in good faith andwithout notice that it was overdue or had been dishonored or that therewas any defense against it, was a subsequent holder in due course againstwhom rescission of a negotiable instrument by an infant is not per-mitted by Section 3-207.SECTION 3-302. Holder In Due Course(I) A holder in due course is a holder who takes the instrument . . .(a) for value; and(b) in good faith(c) without notice that it is overdue or has been dishonored or ofany defense against or claim to it on the part of any person.Snyder v. Town Hills Motors, Inc., 193 Pa. Super. 598, 165 A.2d 293(1960)Where the seller of an automobile exercises dominion over a checkreceived in payment, by directing the buyer to hand it over to a dealerfrom whom the seller was purchasing another automobile, and the buyerdid so and accepted a receipt from the seller, there was a constructivedelivery from the buyer to the seller and subsequently from the sellerto the dealer so that the dealer was a holder in due course. Althoughthe UCC repealed the NIL it did not prescribe any new definitionof the word "delivery"; therefore, the established definition of "de-livery", which provides that transfer may be either actual or construc-tive, should prevail.ARTICLE 6: BULK TRANSFERSSECTION 6-102. "Bulk Transfer"; Transfers of Equipment; Enter-prises Subject to This Article; Bulk Transfer Sub-ject to This Article(1) A "bulk transfer" is any transfer in bulk and not in the ordinarycourse of the transferor's business of a major part of the materials, supplies,merchandise or other inventory (Section 9-109) of an enterprise subject tothis Article.(2) A transfer of a substantial part of the equipment is a bulk transferif it is made in connection with a bulk transfer of inventory, but not other-wise.Uhr v. 3361, Inc., 21 Pa. D. & C. 2d 348 (1960)The sale of a restaurant-taproom business is a bulk transfer.SECTION 6-103. Transfers Excepted From This ArticleThe following transfers are not subject to this Article: . .Uhr v. 3361, Inc., 21 Pa. D. & C. 2d 348 (1960)A claim that a transaction is exempt is an affirmative defense andmust be pleaded by the one claiming that the transaction is excluded.(Where a cited case interprets only a portion of a Code section only that portionis set out)348

Article 6: Bulk Transfers

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School