Uniform Commercial Code § 9-503

10 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Shirley v. State Nat'l Bank OF Conn.
  493 F.2d 739· 2d Cir.· 1974-02-14 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the private repossession of property, even if authorized by common law or statute, constitutes state action when it involves a unilateral taking without consent, thus requiring due process protections.
• James v. Pinnix
  495 F.2d 206· 5th Cir.· 1974-06-10 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the self-help repossession of collateral by a secured creditor under Mississippi Code § 9-503 does not constitute state action, and therefore does not give rise to a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Del's BIG Saver Foods, Inc. v. Carpenter Cook, Inc.
  795 F.2d 1344· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-15 ·cited 23×
  A private party's execution of a state court's ex parte order authorizing property repossession constitutes state action for purposes of a § 1983 claim, and Wisconsin's replevin statute, which allows for ex parte orders secured by a bond and provides for a prompt post-deprivation
• Bryant v. Jefferson Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n
  509 F.2d 511· D.C. Cir.· 1974-12-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the constitutional claim presented was insubstantial and did not require a three-judge district court, affirming the lower court's refusal to convene one.
• Turner v. Impala Motors
  503 F.2d 607· 6th Cir.· 1974-09-20 ·cited 20×
  Peaceful repossession under Tennessee Code Ann. § 47-9-503 is not action under color of state law for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or state action under the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Thompson v. Ford Motor Credit Co.
  550 F.2d 256· 5th Cir.· 1977-04-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the repossession of the automobile was not wrongful, as there was no breach of the peace, and the plaintiff waived claims to personal property left in the vehicle.
• Armende Lesser v. Jewel Factors Corp.
  470 F.2d 108· 2d Cir.· 1972-11-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the transfer of assets from insolvent corporations to a new entity was a fraudulent transfer, and the creditor must repay funds received from this transfer.
• Huber v. Union Planters Nat'l Bank OF Memphis
  491 F.2d 846· 6th Cir.· 1974-02-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff was deprived of her automobile without due process of law, in violation of the Constitution.
• Butler v. Ford Motor Credit Co.
  829 F.2d 568· 5th Cir.· 1987-10-16
  A secured creditor does not breach the peace, and therefore does not illegally repossess a vehicle, by making an unauthorized entry onto the debtor's driveway to remove the vehicle.