Colorado § 4-2-206 - Offer and acceptance in formation of contract.

§ 4-2-206. Offer and acceptance in formation of contract.

(1) Unless otherwise unambiguously indicated by the language or circumstances:

(a) An offer to make a contract shall be construed as inviting acceptance in any manner and by any medium reasonable in the circumstances;

(b) An order or other offer to buy goods for prompt or current shipment shall be construed as inviting acceptance either by a prompt promise to ship or by the prompt or current shipment of conforming or nonconforming goods, but such a shipment of nonconforming goods does not constitute an acceptance if the seller seasonably notifies the buyer that the shipment is offered only as an accommodation to the buyer.

(2) Where the beginning of a requested performance is a reasonable mode of acceptance, an offeror who is not notified of acceptance within a reasonable time may treat the offer as having lapsed before acceptance.

Source: L. 65: p. 1304, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 155-2-206.

ANNOTATION

Where partial performance not adequate acceptance. In cases where the purchase order provides for an acceptance in writing, and the acceptance copy points out that the order is not valid until the acceptance copy is received, the buyer's purchase order does not invite acceptance by partial performance, and the seller's conduct in shipping some of the pumps more than a year after the date of the purchase order does not amount to acceptance. Nations Enters., Inc. v. Process Equip. Co., 40 Colo. App. 390, 579 P.2d 655 (1978).

Small print on acknowledging invoice held not part of contract. Evidence held insufficient to establish that the small print on the invoice acknowledging purchaser's order was a part of the contract. Surplus Electronics Corp. v. Gallin, 653 P.2d 752 (Colo. App. 1982).

A grain reseller's agreement to sell millet to a third party is not the beginning of a requested performance sufficient to constitute acceptance of a millet grower's offer to sell grain to the reseller. The performance desired by the millet grower was payment of money, which was not made, and nothing in the contract with the third party specified that the grain to be resold to the third party was to be grain purchased from the millet grower. Scoular Co. v. Denney, 151 P.3d 615 (Colo. App. 2006).