Ark. Code Ann. » Title 4 Chapter 09
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-303 (2026)

Law governing perfection and priority of security interests in goods covered by a certificate of title

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. This section applies to goods covered by a certificate of title, even if there is no other relationship between the jurisdiction under whose certificate of title the goods are covered and the goods or the debtor.
  2. Goods become covered by a certificate of title when a valid application for the certificate of title and the applicable fee are delivered to the appropriate authority. Goods cease to be covered by a certificate of title at the earlier of the time the certificate of title ceases to be effective under the law of the issuing jurisdiction or the time the goods become covered subsequently by a certificate of title issued by another jurisdiction.
  3. The local law of the jurisdiction under whose certificate of title the goods are covered governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and the priority of a security interest in goods covered by a certificate of title from the time the goods become covered by the certificate of title until the goods cease to be covered by the certificate of title.

History. Acts 2001, No. 1439, § 1.

Case Notes

Certificates of Title.

This section continues in force the perfection of a security interest noted on a foreign certificate of title until a certificate has been issued by another jurisdiction. Strick Corp. v. Eldo-Craft Boat Co., 479 F. Supp. 720 (W.D. Ark. 1979) (decision under prior law).

It is the intention of this section and § 27-14-201 et seq. to allow the security interest in a vehicle perfected in a state other than Arkansas by required notation on a certificate of title issued by that state to remain perfected in this state for a period of four months, and so long thereafter as no certificate of title is issued by this state. Strick Corp. v. Eldo-Craft Boat Co., 479 F. Supp. 720 (W.D. Ark. 1979) (decision under prior law).

When this section speaks of “registration,” the language contemplates the issuance of an Arkansas title, not the procurement of a “nonnegotiable,” “nontitle” registration in connection with the issuance of a vehicle license. Strick Corp. v. Eldo-Craft Boat Co., 479 F. Supp. 720 (W.D. Ark. 1979) (decision under prior law).

Nowhere is there a requirement that vehicles must have been physically present when the certificates of titles perfecting the security interest were issued, only that the vehicles must have been in that jurisdiction when the security interest attached. Strick Corp. v. Eldo-Craft Boat Co., 479 F. Supp. 720 (W.D. Ark. 1979) (decision under prior law).

Where the certificate of title was properly issued and perfected in Oklahoma in accord with Oklahoma law, and Oklahoma is a jurisdiction which permits titling of foreign vehicles, the security agreement was perfected under the pre-2001 version of Arkansas law. Meeks v. Mercedes-Benz Credit Corp. (In re Stinnett), 241 B.R. 599 (Bankr. W.D. Ark. 1999), aff'd, No. 00-1011, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14751 (W.D. Ark. Aug. 28, 2000), aff'd, 257 F.3d 843 (8th Cir. 2001) (decision under prior law).

Although an Arkansas resident has a duty under Arkansas law to seek the issuance of certificates of title in the appropriate forum, the creditor has no obligation to make a filing in another state to perfect or reperfect its security interest, and the creditor's interest continues to be perfected despite a resident's failure to comply with the pre-2001 version of Arkansas registration laws. Meeks v. Mercedes-Benz Credit Corp. (In re Stinnett), 241 B.R. 599 (Bankr. W.D. Ark. 1999), aff'd, No. 00-1011, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14751 (W.D. Ark. Aug. 28, 2000), aff'd, 257 F.3d 843 (8th Cir. 2001) (decision under prior law).

The fact that the debtor may have avoided higher fees or taxes imposed by the State of Arkansas by registering and titling his vehicles in Oklahoma is of no consequence to the perfection question, and the appropriate outcome for debtor's failure to comply with the pre-2001 version of Arkansas state law is not to punish the creditor, but if the state chooses to enforce the relevant provisions of Arkansas law, the appropriate and existing remedies are prosecution of the debtor. Meeks v. Mercedes-Benz Credit Corp. (In re Stinnett), 241 B.R. 599 (Bankr. W.D. Ark. 1999), aff'd, No. 00-1011, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14751 (W.D. Ark. Aug. 28, 2000), aff'd, 257 F.3d 843 (8th Cir. 2001) (decision under prior law).

In a replevin case, certificates of title were not material to the issue of whether a creditor could repossess mobile homes as a result of a debtor's default on her payments; the contract in which the debtor agreed to pay for the homes was the relevant document in the case, and the debtor did not dispute the veracity of that document. Edgerly v. Vanderbilt Mortg. & Fin., Inc., 2016 Ark. App. 241, 492 S.W.3d 100 (2016).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1989–2016 · leading case: Herringer v. Mercantile Bank of Jonesboro, 866 S.W.2d 390 (Ark. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Herringer v. Mercantile Bank of Jonesboro, 866 S.W.2d 390 (Ark. 1993). · cites it 4× “However, the bank’s interest was not perfected until the security interest had attached, under Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-303 (1) (1987): (1) A security interest is perfected when it has attached and when all of the applicable steps required for perfection have been taken.”
In Re Johnson, 407 B.R. 364 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2009). · cites it 2× “Arkansas Code Annotated § 27-14-101 et seq., also known as the Uniform Motor Vehicle Administration, Certificate of Title, and Antitheft Act (The Certificate of Title Act), governs the perfection of security interest in vehicles required to be registered.”
Wawak v. Affiliated Food Stores, Inc., 812 S.W.2d 679 (Ark. 1991). · cites it 4× “Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-303 (1) (1987) provides that when all the applicable steps to perfect a security interest are taken before the interest attaches, it is perfected at the time it attaches.”
River Valley Bank of Russellville v. Ace Sports Mgmt., LLC (In Re Ace Sports Mgmt., LLC), 271 B.R. 134 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2001). · cites it 2× “Ark.Code Ann. § 4-9-303(l)(Michie 1991); Bank of the West v.”
Tradax Am., Inc. v. First Nat'l Bank in Stuttgart (In Re Howell Enter., Inc.), 105 B.R. 494 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 1989). · cites it 2× “Ark.Code Ann. § 4-9-303(1). See Bank of the West v.”
Beebe v. MacMillan Petroleum (Arkansas), Inc. (In Re MacMillan Petroleum (Arkansas), Inc.), 115 B.R. 175 (Bankr. W.D. Ark. 1990). · cites it 2× “Ark.Code Ann. § 4-9-303(1). See Bank of the West v.”
Edgerly v. Vanderbilt Mortg. & Fin., Inc., 2016 Ark. App. 241 (Ark. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Arkansas Code Annotated section 4-9-303 (Repl.2001) governs the perfection and priority of security interests in goods covered by a certificate of title.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-303(1) — 2 cases
Tradax Am., Inc. v. First Nat'l Bank in Stuttgart (In Re Howell Enter., Inc.), 105 B.R. 494 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 1989). “Ark.Code Ann. § 4-9-303(1). See Bank of the West v.”
Beebe v. MacMillan Petroleum (Arkansas), Inc. (In Re MacMillan Petroleum (Arkansas), Inc.), 115 B.R. 175 (Bankr. W.D. Ark. 1990). “Ark.Code Ann. § 4-9-303(1). See Bank of the West v.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-303(2) — 1 case
Wawak v. Affiliated Food Stores, Inc., 812 S.W.2d 679 (Ark. 1991). “Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-303 (1) (1987) provides that when all the applicable steps to perfect a security interest are taken before the interest attaches, it is perfected at the time it attaches.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-303(c) — 1 case
In Re Johnson, 407 B.R. 364 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2009). “Arkansas Code Annotated § 27-14-101 et seq., also known as the Uniform Motor Vehicle Administration, Certificate of Title, and Antitheft Act (The Certificate of Title Act), governs the perfection of security interest in vehicles required to be registered.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-303(l) — 1 case
River Valley Bank of Russellville v. Ace Sports Mgmt., LLC (In Re Ace Sports Mgmt., LLC), 271 B.R. 134 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2001). “Ark.Code Ann. § 4-9-303(l)(Michie 1991); Bank of the West v.”
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.