Uniform Commercial Code Article 9

166 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Elliott
  953 F.2d 1556· 11th Cir.· 1992-02-27 ·cited 54×
  The Eleventh Circuit certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question whether Florida tax certificates constitute interests in land excluded from Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, or personal property general intangibles requiring financing statement perfection. Credit
• Bichel Optical Labs., Inc. v. The Marquette Nat'l Bank OF Minneapolis
  487 F.2d 906· 8th Cir.· 1973-11-07 ·cited 44×
  The court held that a bank's seizure of a borrower's funds and collateral under a loan agreement, even if authorized by state statute, does not constitute state action for purposes of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim.
• United States v. Hext
  444 F.2d 804· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-25 ·cited 36×
  The court held that buyers in the ordinary course of business, who purchased cotton from a gin owned by the farmer who granted the FHA a security interest, took the cotton free of that security interest under UCC § 9-307(1). Consequently, intermediaries who facilitated the sale w
• In re Tri-State Equip., Inc. v. Tri-State Equip., Inc.
  792 F.2d 967· 10th Cir.· 1986-06-03 ·cited 34×
  A financing statement's description of collateral is sufficient if it puts hypothetical future creditors on notice of a possible security interest, even if the description is ambiguous or contains minor errors.
• The Nat'l Shawmut Bank OF Boston v. NEW Amsterdam Cas. Co., Inc.
  411 F.2d 843· 1st Cir.· 1969-05-05 ·cited 30×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, reaffirming its prior decision that a surety's right of subrogation is not displaced by Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
• Am. Standard Credit, Inc. v. Nat'l Cement Co.
  643 F.2d 248· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that one of the district court's key factual findings was clearly erroneous, requiring reversal of its judgment, but remanded for further proceedings due to lack of findings on other crucial issues.
• In re Hammons v. Fedders Fin. Corp.
  614 F.2d 399· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-24 ·cited 23×
  The court held that Fedders' security interest was unperfected because it failed to file in the correct county at the time of perfection, and Borg-Warner's filing, despite minor errors, was sufficient.
• In re Mitchell v. Shepherd Mall State Bank & Small Bus. Admin.
  458 F.2d 700· 10th Cir.· 1972-04-14 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a security agreement's classification boxes, without explicit granting language, do not create a security interest in collateral not otherwise described.
• The Barnett Bank OF Tallahassee v. Campbell
  402 So. 2d 12· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-06-17 ·cited 21×
  Barnett Bank sought a deficiency judgment against Campbell, a guarantor of a promissory note secured by business equipment and motor vehicles, after the collateral was sold following the debtor corporation's bankruptcy. The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the deficienc
• In re Compton Corp. v. Blue Quail Energy, Inc.
  831 F.2d 586· 5th Cir.· 1987-11-12 ·cited 20×
  A creditor cannot use a letter of credit to secure payment of an unsecured antecedent debt, as this constitutes an indirect preferential transfer recoverable by the bankruptcy trustee.
• S. Developers & Earthmoving, Inc. v. Caterpillar Fin. Servs. Corp.
  56 So. 3d 56· Fla. 2d DCA· 2011-02-23 ·cited 18×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment for a deficiency judgment, holding that the creditor failed to prove the commercial reasonableness of the sale of repossessed equipment. The court found that the creditor did not provide sufficient evidence of the s
• Rogers v. Allis-Chalmers Credit Corp.
  679 F.2d 138· 8th Cir.· 1982-06-01 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that sufficient evidence existed to support the jury's finding of wrongful repossession based on waiver or breach of the peace, and that lost profits were proven with reasonable certainty.
• U. S. Indus., Inc. v. Gregg
  540 F.2d 142· 3d Cir.· 1976-07-19 ·cited 18×
  The court held that Delaware's sequestration statute, which asserts jurisdiction based solely on the statutory situs of corporate stock, does not comport with the constitutional requirement of minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction.
• In re Yale Express Sys., Inc. v. Yale Express Sys.
  370 F.2d 433· 2d Cir.· 1966-12-16 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court had the power to stay enforcement of a lien even if the lienor retained title to the property, departing from prior precedent.
• Giles v. SUN Bank, N.A.
  450 So. 2d 258· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-04-19 ·cited 17×
  An informal employment agreement constitutes a valid equitable assignment of contract rights where the parties plainly intended assignment and the assignee assumed performance obligations, even without special words of art. Such assignment has priority over subsequent garnishment
• Blackhawk Heating & Plumbing Co. Inc. v. Geeslin
  530 F.2d 154· 7th Cir.· 1976-02-06 ·cited 17×
  The federal court lacked jurisdiction to order the turnover of assets because a state court had already acquired prior in rem jurisdiction over the property through liquidation proceedings.
• FOY v. First Nat'l Bank OF Elkhart
  868 F.2d 251· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-08 ·cited 16×
  A buyer in the ordinary course of business takes free of a perfected security interest, even if the buyer's dealings with the seller deviate from common trade practices, as long as the buyer acts in good faith and without knowledge of the violation.
• In re Daniels-Head & Assocs. dba Head Ins. v. William M. Mercer, Inc.
  819 F.2d 914· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-15 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court properly applied the standard of review and affirmed the bankruptcy court's findings that the appellees were not unjustly enriched by receiving insurance records and did not intentionally interfere with the appellant's contractual relationsh
• In re Pubs
  618 F.2d 432· 7th Cir.· 1980-03-07 ·cited 16×
  A security interest can attach and be enforceable even if the debtor lacks formal 'rights in the collateral' when the true owner is estopped from denying the security interest's validity.
• In re Fuqua v. First Nat'l Bank OF Howard
  461 F.2d 1186· 10th Cir.· 1972-06-13 ·cited 14×
  A financing statement describing collateral as 'All Personal Property' is insufficient under the Kansas Uniform Commercial Code because it lacks the required specificity to identify the collateral.
• In re Varney Wood Prods., Inc. v. J. Glenwood Strickler in Bankr. for Varney Wood Prods., Inc.
  458 F.2d 435· 4th Cir.· 1972-04-06 ·cited 14×
  A financing statement describing collateral as 'accounts receivable' is sufficient to perfect a security interest in the proceeds of a contract, under the Uniform Commercial Code's notice filing system.
• United Va. Bank/Seaboard Nat'l v. B. F. Saul Real Est. Inv. Tr.
  641 F.2d 185· 4th Cir.· 1981-02-20 ·cited 13×
  A deed of trust can create a valid security interest in personal property under the UCC, even if its primary purpose is a real estate lien, and parties may be estopped from asserting inconsistent positions regarding that security interest.
• Nat'l Equip. Rental, Ltd. v. Hendrix
  565 F.2d 255· 2d Cir.· 1977-11-11 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the jury's finding that the equipment lease agreements were usurious loan agreements was supported by sufficient evidence and that the waiver of jury trial clause was invalid.
• City Nat'l Bank OF Fort Smith v. Unique Structures, Inc.
  929 F.2d 1308· 8th Cir.· 1991-04-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in ruling that notices of sale of collateral were reasonable as a matter of law and that the jury's verdict was supported by substantial evidence.
• In re Tillery v. Stikes
  571 F.2d 1361· 5th Cir.· 1978-04-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the agreement was a lease intended for security, not a pure lease, because the lessee acquired equity in the vehicle and bore risks of loss and gain.
• Transp. Equip. Co. v. Guar. State Bank
  518 F.2d 377· 10th Cir.· 1975-06-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Bank's security interest was not perfected by possession prior to TECO's filing, and that the trial court erred in calculating damages based on the retail value of fully assembled goods.
• In re Wilco Forest Mach., Inc. v. Eaton Corp.
  491 F.2d 1041· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Eaton's security interest was validly perfected and the transfer of assets was not a voidable preference or fraudulent transfer, but affirmed the requirement for an accounting to assess potential inequitable conduct.
• Swan Landing Dev., LLC v. Fla. Cap. Bank, N.A.
  19 So. 3d 1068· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-10-02 ·cited 11×
  Swan Landing and Yazdani appealed a trial court's denial of their motion to compel arbitration of claims brought by Florida Capital Bank involving a mortgage foreclosure, breach of promissory note, and breach of commercial guaranty. The court held that while the foreclosure claim
• Tropical Jewelers, Inc. v. Nationsbank
  781 So. 2d 392· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-12-27 ·cited 11×
  The Florida Third District Court of Appeal held that a guarantor is a 'debtor' under Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code and therefore cannot waive the statutory requirement that a secured creditor dispose of collateral in a commercially reasonable manner. The court reversed
• Citizens Nat'l Bank OF Orlando v. Barbara Bornstein for Nat'l Indem. Co. of Omaha
  374 So. 2d 6· Fla.· 1979-07-18 ·cited 11×
  The Florida Supreme Court answered certified questions from the Fifth Circuit regarding whether a non-negotiable certificate of deposit assigned as security for a bond is subject to Article 9 of the UCC and whether the bank obligor retains set-off rights against the assignee. The
• In re Automated Bookbinding Servs., Inc. v. Hans Mueller Corp.
  471 F.2d 546· 4th Cir.· 1972-12-27 ·cited 11×
  A debtor receives 'possession' of collateral under UCC § 9-312(4) upon physical delivery, not upon completion of contractual tender of delivery terms. A secured party's purchase money security interest loses priority if not perfected within ten days of the debtor receiving posses
• Peoples Nat'l Bank OF Wash. v. United States
  777 F.2d 459· 9th Cir.· 1985-11-25 ·cited 10×
  Neither an unexercised right of setoff nor a security agreement that transfers no control over a deposit account creates an interest superior to a federal tax lien.
• In re Equitable Dev. Corp. v. Morry Wingold & W & G Holdings, Ltd.
  617 F.2d 1152· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendants' purported security interest in accounts receivable and contracts was subject to the Uniform Commercial Code filing requirements and was unperfected, and their interest in real property was unrecorded, thus neither was enforceable against the Tr
• Am. Invs-Co Countryside, Inc. v. Riverdale Bank
  596 F.2d 211· 7th Cir.· 1979-03-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a dispute between private parties concerning the interpretation of an FHA regulatory agreement, where the FHA's interest is not directly contested, does not arise under federal law for subject matter jurisdiction purposes.
• Cleveland Chair Co. & William R. Jackson v. The United States
  557 F.2d 244· Ct. Cl.· 1977-06-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the government, as a pledgee of Treasury bills, had no duty to reinvest matured bills or notify the owner of their maturity, and thus did not breach any implied security agreement.
• Charles E. Siljeg in Bankr. for Henry House Packing Co., Inc. v. The Nat'l Bank OF Commerce OF Seattle
  509 F.2d 1009· 9th Cir.· 1975-01-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the effectiveness of a financing statement under the Uniform Commercial Code depends on whether it substantially complies with requirements and is not seriously misleading to creditors, rather than a strict determination of the "true name" of the debtor corpor
• United States v. Bell Credit Union
  860 F.2d 365· 10th Cir.· 1988-10-21 ·cited 9×
  Credit unions must surrender member share accounts to IRS levies, and their claims of statutory or contractual liens do not establish priority over federal tax liens. Failure to comply without reasonable cause incurs penalties.
• Midland-Guardian Co. v. Hagin
  370 So. 2d 25· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-03-07 ·cited 9×
  Midland-Guardian, an assignee of a promissory note and retail installment contract secured by a mobile home, sought to replevy the home from Hagin, who held legal title subject to Midland-Guardian's lien. The court held that under the Uniform Commercial Code, an assignee 'with re
• In re David F. LaROCHE. David F. LaROCHE v. Amoskeag Bank
  969 F.2d 1299· 1st Cir.· 1992-07-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the involuntary bankruptcy petition was validly filed, as the petitioning creditors acted in good faith and met statutory requirements. The court affirmed the order for relief.
• In re Burkart Farm & Livestock v. Serelson
  938 F.2d 1114· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a land description in a security agreement for growing crops is insufficient if it uses vague language like 'in and around' specific sections, failing to reasonably identify the land concerned.
• Warnaco, Inc. v. Farkas
  872 F.2d 539· 2d Cir.· 1989-04-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the guarantee was unambiguous and the trademarks were collateral, but remanded for determination of trademark value and findings on fraudulent misrepresentation.
• Aircraft Trading & Servs., Inc. v. Braniff, Inc.
  819 F.2d 1227· 2d Cir.· 1987-05-22 ·cited 8×
  A security interest in an aircraft engine, though unperfected at the time of intermediate sales, is not extinguished if the buyer is not in the ordinary course of business, and priority between competing perfected interests is determined by the first to file or perfect.
• Maxl Sales Co. v. Critiques, Inc.
  796 F.2d 1293· 10th Cir.· 1986-07-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a perfected security interest in inventory is not lost under Kan.Stat.Ann. § 84-9-306(4) when the inventory is sold after the institution of state insolvency proceedings, even if the proceeds are later commingled with other funds in federal bankruptcy proceedi
• Interfirst Bank OF Abilene, N.A. v. Lull Mfg.
  778 F.2d 228· 5th Cir.· 1985-12-12 ·cited 8×
  A bank's perfected security interest in a buyer's after-acquired property attaches to goods upon delivery, even if the buyer defaults on payment, and is superior to an unperfected seller's interest.
• Vance J. Siltzer and Joann A. Siltzer v. N. First Bank
  445 So. 2d 649· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-02-15 ·cited 8×
  The Siltzers borrowed from North First Bank using a promissory note secured by personal property (business inventory) and a second mortgage on their residence. After the Siltzers' business closed and they filed bankruptcy, the bank sold the inventory without proper UCC notice and
• Barnett Bank OF Clearwater v. Rompon
  377 So. 2d 981· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-11-07 ·cited 8×
  A bank that financed a mobile home and perfected its security interest with the Department of Motor Vehicles sought to foreclose after the mobile home was affixed to land and became a fixture to real property. The court held that even when a mobile home becomes a fixture, it rema
• Barbara Bornstein for Nat'l Indem. Co. of Omaha v. Citizens Nat'l Bank OF Orlando
  564 F.2d 721· 5th Cir.· 1977-12-15 ·cited 8×
  This is a certification of questions of law from the Fifth Circuit to the Florida Supreme Court, not a decision on the merits.
• In re LAW Research Serv., Inc. v. Crook
  524 F.2d 301· 2d Cir.· 1975-07-21 ·cited 8×
  The bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to determine the validity of a filed secured claim even after confirmation of an arrangement, especially when the claim's validity was contested by the debtor.
• In re Bristol Assocs., Inc.
  505 F.2d 1056· 3d Cir.· 1974-11-05 ·cited 8×
  A lender taking a security interest in a lessor-borrower's lease and rents thereunder does not need to comply with Article 9 filing provisions to perfect its interest against a Receiver in bankruptcy.
• TKO Equip. Co. v. C & G Coal Co., Inc.
  863 F.2d 541· 7th Cir.· 1988-11-29 ·cited 7×
  A party cannot attack its own characterization of a transaction as a lease after signing documents disclaiming a security interest, especially to the detriment of a third party who relied on those documents.