UCC Document Community

Have you considered that there might be multiple pieces of collateral with different classifications? Some equipment might qualify as fixtures while other pieces remain moveable. The Bank of Boston analysis might apply differently to each category of collateral.

The Bank of Boston case really highlights how critical it is to get the technical details right in these priority disputes. From what you've described, it sounds like the competing creditor may have several potential weaknesses: (1) claiming fixture status without proper fixture filing procedures, (2) possible defects in their UCC-1 filing itself, and (3) potential timing issues with their PMSI claim. I'd suggest starting with a thorough review of their actual filing - check the debtor name against charter documents, verify the collateral description is sufficient, and confirm they met all technical requirements. If they're claiming PMSI priority on fixtures, they absolutely need to have filed properly in the real estate records within the required timeframe. The fact that they only filed a regular UCC-1 but are claiming fixture priority seems like a fundamental contradiction that could invalidate their entire position.

Update us when you get the termination filed! Always curious to hear how these situations work out and whether the lender actually meets their timeline.

Pro tip from someone who's been through this multiple times - create a simple tracking spreadsheet with key dates: loan payoff date, lender's promised filing date, actual filing date, and confirmation received date. This helps you stay organized and gives you clear documentation if you need to escalate with the lender or explain delays to your new financing source. Also, if your equipment is critical to operations, consider getting a letter from your current lender stating the loan is satisfied even before the UCC-3 is filed - some new lenders will accept this as interim documentation while waiting for the public record to update.

Perfect timing on this thread. I have a similar situation coming up next month with industrial bakery equipment. The ovens are basically built into the building structure so fixture filing makes sense. Glad to see the consensus on the approach.

Just wanted to add from recent experience - when dealing with mixed collateral like this, I always recommend doing a site inspection with photos documenting exactly what equipment is permanently attached vs. what could potentially be moved. For your manufacturing facility, take pictures of the machinery foundations, electrical/plumbing connections, and any structural modifications made to accommodate the equipment. This documentation becomes invaluable if there's ever a dispute about what qualifies as fixtures vs. personal property. Also helps with insurance coverage determinations down the line. The visual evidence makes the fixture filing much more defensible if challenged.

This discussion has been incredibly thorough and helpful! As someone new to UCC citation work, I want to make sure I understand the key takeaways correctly. So the standard format is "U.C.C. § [article]-[section]" with periods after each letter for model code citations, and when citing state-specific versions I should use the actual state statute citation like "Cal. Com. Code § 9315." For official comments, it's "U.C.C. § 9-315 cmt. 2." One thing I'm still unclear on - when should I include pinpoint citations to specific subsections versus citing the broader section? For example, if I'm discussing the general concept of proceeds under Article 9 but my specific argument relates to subsection (a)(2), should I cite "U.C.C. § 9-315" or "U.C.C. § 9-315(a)(2)"? I want to be as precise as possible while following proper bluebook format.

This has been an incredibly comprehensive discussion on UCC bluebook citations! I'm working on my first secured transactions case and had been struggling with exactly these formatting questions. The clarification about "U.C.C." with periods versus "UCC" without periods is crucial - I almost made that mistake in my draft brief. One additional resource I've found helpful is the bluebook's Table T1, which lists the specific citation formats for each state's commercial code. For example, it shows that Florida uses "Fla. Stat. § 679.315" rather than a separate commercial code citation. This is particularly useful when you're dealing with states that haven't adopted a separate commercial code structure. Also, for anyone citing UCC provisions in footnotes versus in-text, remember that the citation format remains the same but footnote citations can include additional explanatory parentheticals that might be too cumbersome in the main text, like noting when a provision was amended or differs from the model code.

I've been doing secured transactions for 15 years and these 1-308 claims pop up maybe once a year. Never seen one actually succeed in court. Your equipment security interest is solid under 9-109(1) regardless of their reservations.

Welcome to the world of secured transactions! You're absolutely right - Article 9 isn't a menu where debtors can pick and choose which provisions apply to them. The UCC 1-308 "reservation of rights" is one of those legal concepts that sounds powerful but gets misapplied constantly. Think of it this way: if you sign a lease for an apartment while writing "UCC 1-308" next to your signature, you're still bound by the lease terms - you've just preserved your right to later argue the lease was invalid for some other reason (like fraud or duress). It doesn't magically make you not a tenant. Same principle applies here with secured transactions.