## Facts

- Hemmert Agricultural Aviation, Inc., a Kansas crop-spraying business, purchased a Model G-164B Ag-Cat 600 Super “B” aircraft from Mid-Continent Aircraft Corp., an authorized Ag-Cat dealer.
- Hemmert had previously operated a used 1977 “B” model Ag-Cat and expected the Super B, based on advertising and the seller’s statements, to be faster and more maneuverable due to design features such as a raised upper wing and larger hopper.
- After delivery, Hemmert reported that the Super B was unresponsive, rolled excessively, and felt as if it were “falling out from under” the pilot.
- Other experienced agricultural spray pilots flew the aircraft and reported similar dissatisfaction with its handling and maneuverability.
- Mid-Continent sent a mechanic who replaced the engine and test-flew the aircraft, concluding there was nothing wrong with it, but the reported handling problems persisted.
- Hemmert Ag notified Mid-Continent that it was revoking acceptance of the aircraft; Mid-Continent refused to accept the revocation, and Hemmert Ag sued in a Kansas federal diversity action for revocation and damages.

## Issues

1. Whether the buyer could revoke acceptance under Kansas’s U.C.C. because the aircraft’s nonconformity substantially impaired its value to the buyer.
2. Whether revocation was made within a reasonable time and after giving the seller a reasonable opportunity to cure.
3. What damages were recoverable following revocation under U.C.C. remedies.

## Decision

- The court held the transaction was a sale of goods governed by the Kansas U.C.C. and that Hemmert Ag was entitled to revoke acceptance.
- The court found the aircraft’s handling and performance characteristics, as delivered, did not conform to the buyer’s reasonable expectations formed from the seller’s representations.
- The court concluded the nonconformity substantially impaired the aircraft’s value to Hemmert Ag given the demands of low-altitude, maneuver-intensive crop-spraying operations.
- The court found Hemmert Ag acted within a reasonable time, provided notice, and allowed Mid-Continent an opportunity to remedy the problem before revoking.
- The court awarded damages consistent with U.C.C. remedies associated with revocation and resulting losses.

## Legal Principles

- Under Kansas’s version of U.C.C. § 2-608, a buyer may revoke acceptance if a nonconformity substantially impairs the value of goods to the buyer, revocation occurs within a reasonable time after discovery, and the buyer notifies the seller before a substantial non-defect-related change in the goods.
- “Substantial impairment” may be assessed in light of the buyer’s intended use and business context, especially where performance characteristics are central to the goods’ commercial value.
- Credible end-user testimony about operational performance can establish nonconformity and substantial impairment even if a mechanic opines the product is mechanically sound.
- A buyer generally must provide timely notice and a reasonable opportunity for the seller to cure before revocation is effective.

## Conclusion

The court permitted revocation of acceptance of a crop-dusting aircraft under the Kansas U.C.C. because the aircraft’s handling characteristics materially interfered with its suitability for the buyer’s specialized use, and it awarded damages after finding timely notice and a reasonable opportunity to cure.


Hemmert Agricultural Aviation, Inc. v. Mid-Continent Aircraft Corp., 663 F. Supp. 1546 (D. Kan. 1987)