Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-9203 (2026)

Attachment and enforceability of security interest; proceeds; supporting obligations; formal requisites

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. A security interest attaches to collateral when it becomes enforceable against the debtor with respect to the collateral, unless an agreement expressly postpones the time of attachment.

B. Except as otherwise provided in subsections C through I of this section, a security interest is enforceable against the debtor and third parties with respect to the collateral only if:

1. Value has been given;

2. The debtor has rights in the collateral or the power to transfer rights in the collateral to a secured party; and

3. One of the following conditions is met:

(a) The debtor has authenticated a security agreement that provides a description of the collateral and, if the security interest covers timber to be cut, a description of the land concerned;

(b) The collateral is not a certificated security and is in the possession of the secured party under section 47-9313 pursuant to the debtor's security agreement;

(c) The collateral is a certificated security in registered form and the security certificate has been delivered to the secured party under section 47-8301 pursuant to the debtor's security agreement; or

(d) The collateral is deposit accounts, electronic chattel paper, investment property, letter-of-credit rights or electronic documents, and the secured party has control under section 47-7106, 47-9104, 47-9105, 47-9106 or 47-9107 pursuant to the debtor's security agreement.

C. Subsection B of this section is subject to section 47-4210 on the security interest of a collecting bank, section 47-5118 on the security interest of a letter-of-credit issuer or nominated person, section 47-9110 on a security interest arising under chapter 2 or 2A of this title, and section 47-9206 on security interests in investment property.

D. A person becomes bound as debtor by a security agreement entered into by another person if, by operation of law other than this chapter or by contract:

1. The security agreement becomes effective to create a security interest in the person's property; or

2. The person becomes generally obligated for the obligations of the other person, including the obligation secured under the security agreement, and acquires or succeeds to all or substantially all of the assets of the other person.

E. If a new debtor becomes bound as debtor by a security agreement entered into by another person:

1. The agreement satisfies subsection B, paragraph 3 of this section with respect to existing or after-acquired property of the new debtor to the extent the property is described in the agreement; and

2. Another agreement is not necessary to make a security interest in the property enforceable.

F. The attachment of a security interest in collateral gives the secured party the rights to proceeds provided by section 47-9315 and is also attachment of a security interest in a supporting obligation for the collateral.

G. The attachment of a security interest in a right to payment or performance secured by a security interest or other lien on personal or real property is also attachment of a security interest in the security interest, mortgage or other lien.

H. The attachment of a security interest in a securities account is also attachment of a security interest in the security entitlements carried in the securities account.

I. The attachment of a security interest in a commodity account is also attachment of a security interest in the commodity contracts carried in the commodity account.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1984–2023 · leading case: Valley Nat'l Bank v. Cotton Growers Hail Ins., 747 P.2d 1225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Valley Nat'l Bank v. Cotton Growers Hail Ins., 747 P.2d 1225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “But, Paloma Ranch had at least a contingency interest in the proceeds of the insurance at the time the loss occurred.”

Connelly v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n ex rel. Benefit of Harborview Mortg. Loan Trust 2005-3 (In re Connelly), 487 B.R. 230 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 2013). · cites it 4× “In the Response, Plaintiff contends that the challenge to Defendant’s right to enforce the Note and DOT has “two basic layers”: 1) the sale of the Note and DOT violated a mortgage pooling and servicing agreement, contravening New York trust law; 2) the Note was not transferred…”

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Loop 76, LLC (In Re Loop 76, LLC), 465 B.R. 525 (9th Cir. BAP 2012). “” A.R.S. § 47-9203 requires that a security agreement describe the collateral.”

In Re: Tower Air, Inc., Debtor Charles A. Stanziale, Jr., Chapter 7 Tr. of Tower Air, Inc. v. Finova Capital Corp., 397 F.3d 191 (3rd Cir. 2005). “The parties here did not opt out of this default; rather, they explicitly granted FINOVA a security interest in proceeds in the mortgage.”

Rodney v. Arizona Bank, 836 P.2d 434 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. §§ 47-9203(A) and 47-9305 provide that a secured party may perfect a security interest in collateral in the form of an instrument or negotiable document by taking possession of the collateral.”

Elf Atochem North Am., Inc. v. Celco, Inc., 927 P.2d 355 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 3× “Section 47-9203 sets forth three prerequisites for attachment: A.”

Park Tucson Investors Ltd. P'ship v. Ali, 770 F. Supp. 531 (D. Ariz. 1991). · cites it 5× “A.R.S. § 47-9203 provides the requirements for an enforceable security interest.”

Arizona Farmers Prod. Credit Ass'n v. Northside Hay Mill & Trading Co., 736 P.2d 816 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “The March 16, 1983 purchase agreement between Duncan and Northside satisfies the requirements of § 47-9203(A)(1) and created a security interest in the cattle sold.”

Pavilion Hotel, Inc. v. Valley Nat'l Bank, 885 P.2d 186 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). “Security Agreement PSI first argues that it was not a party to the security agreement between PHI and MONY, and therefore MONY cannot have a security interest against PSI’s bank accounts.”

Clark v. Airavada Corp., 12 F. Supp. 2d 1114 (D. Nev. 1998). · cites it 2× “Third, it argues that even if Clark is a protected purchaser and is not bound by the transfer restriction, he failed to perfect his security interest pursuant to Ariz. Rev.Stat. Ann. § 47-9203 (West 1998).”

Marlow v. Rollins Cotton Co. (In Re Julien Co.), 168 B.R. 647 (Bankr. W.D. Tenn. 1994). “§§ 47-9203(A) and 47-9305, the court stated that a secured party may “perfect” by taking possession but here the secured party never had possession of the collateral, yet “took constructive possession” when it notified holder of collateral of its security interest). This…”

Poling v. Morgan, 598 F. Supp. 686 (D. Ariz. 1984). · cites it 3× “Proper consideration should be given to A.R.S. § 47-9203(A). The key question should have been whether the defendants were in possession of the security under an implied agreement with the debtor, the voluntary abandonment.”

Show all 16 citing cases →

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-9203(A) — 6 cases

Rodney v. Arizona Bank, 836 P.2d 434 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992). “A.R.S. §§ 47-9203(A) and 47-9305 provide that a secured party may perfect a security interest in collateral in the form of an instrument or negotiable document by taking possession of the collateral.”

Elf Atochem North Am., Inc. v. Celco, Inc., 927 P.2d 355 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). “Section 47-9203 sets forth three prerequisites for attachment: A.”

Poling v. Morgan, 598 F. Supp. 686 (D. Ariz. 1984). “Proper consideration should be given to A.R.S. § 47-9203(A). The key question should have been whether the defendants were in possession of the security under an implied agreement with the debtor, the voluntary abandonment.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-9203(A)(1) — 1 case

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-9203(B) — 1 case

Garcia v. Dealers Auto (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 47-9203(F) — 1 case

Sentinel Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Head to Toe Therapy Inc. (D. Ariz. 2023).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.