Shimamoto v. S&F Warehouses, Inc. (2002)
Retention note (2026-10-18 review): the 10/17 reading of this opinion was not kept as a stored copy, and nycourts.gov now refuses automated requests, so it was not re-fetched. The summary below has not been re-checked against a retained copy and supports no New York module-12 field marked supported.
Decided: October 24, 2002. Opinion: Ciparick, J.; Kaye, C.J., dissented. Full official corrected opinion, including dissent/footnotes, retrieved 2026-10-17.
Facts and issue
Commercial fabric was sold to the warehouse as sole bidder to satisfy unpaid storage fees. The auctioneer used an outdated notice omitting the then-required right to contest under former UCC 7-211. Plaintiff conceded the lien’s validity. The appeal followed dismissal of remaining claims for failure first to demand return of the goods.
Holding and reasoning
The Court modified and remitted. The record did not show the reckless disregard necessary for willful-conversion damages. A nonwillful breach could nonetheless support statutory damages if causally proved; a demand for return was not a prerequisite to that statutory claim. Omission of contest-right notice did not itself demonstrate loss where the lien was conceded. The plaintiff could try to prove a commercially unreasonable sale and lower proceeds, taking account of the warehouse and customs liens (99 NY2d at 172–176).
Practical impact
Do not make every procedural defect an automatic conversion or full-value damages award. The Court’s majority, not the dissent’s proposed demand requirement, controls its disposition. The case did not grant every warehouse buyer title against interests the lien could not bind.
Historical fit and later treatment
Current UCC 7-210(i) retains the damages/willful-conversion distinction. But the opinion’s former § 7-211 notice requirement is historical. The full S7816 enacted-bill text, § 23 replaces Article 7; the official bill record reports signed chapter 505 on December 17, 2014. Current §§ 7-209/210 do not reproduce the former notice, and the attempted § 7-211 endpoint returned an index. The continued constitutional/hearing implications require independent reconciliation; this is not a conclusion that a warehouse can dispense with all opportunity to contest.
Exact-name/citation public searches retrieved the original corrected and bound-volume opinions and earlier litigation, but no verified post-revision resolution of that precise question. Comprehensive later treatment and the constitutional fit remain needs_verification.
Applies in →
new-york · equipment-and-machinery · towing-storage-and-mechanics-lien-sales
Disclaimer. Legal information, not legal advice. This summarizes a decision that later authority may limit or distinguish. Read the full opinion and consult a licensed attorney.