These (title and risk of loss) are issues that do not generally come up in common law cases. Why?
Discuss and evaluate what is different in UCC transactions that makes these issues so important. Do the rules make sense? Remember that as with all things dealing with Article 2, these provisions as set forth in the text only apply if not otherwise agreed by the parties. That in itself is a unique situation. Why the latitude? What justifies it.
Finally, look at the Entrustment Rule, especially the Lindholm case. Discuss the rationale behind this rule. Why so much deference to the buyer in the ordinary course of business/good faith purchaser for value?