California Codes

Cal. Commercial Code § 9312 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)A security interest in chattel paper, controllable accounts, controllable electronic records, controllable payment intangibles, instruments, investment property, or negotiable documents may be perfected by filing.

(b)Except as otherwise provided in subdivisions (c) and (d) of Section 9315 for proceeds, all of the following apply:

(1)A security interest in a deposit account may be perfected only by control under Section 9314.

(2)Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (d) of Section 9308, a security interest in a letter-of-credit right may be perfected only by control under Section 9314.

(3)A security interest in tangible money may be perfected only by the secured party’s taking possession under Section 9313.

(4)A security interest in, or claim in or under, any policy of insurance, including unearned premiums, may be perfected only by giving written notice of the security interest or claim to the insurer. This paragraph does not apply to a health care insurance receivable. A security interest in a health care insurance receivable may be perfected only as otherwise provided in this division.

(5)A security interest in electronic money may be perfected only by control under Section 9314.

(c)While goods are in the possession of a bailee that has issued a negotiable document covering the goods, both of the following apply:

(1)A security interest in the goods may be perfected by perfecting a security interest in the document.

(2)A security interest perfected in the document has priority over any security interest that becomes perfected in the goods by another method during that time.

(d)While goods are in the possession of a bailee that has issued a nonnegotiable document covering the goods, a security interest in the goods may be perfected by any of the following methods:

(1)Issuance of a document in the name of the secured party.

(2)The bailee’s receipt of notification of the secured party’s interest.

(3)Filing as to the goods.

(e)A security interest in certificated securities, negotiable documents, or instruments is perfected without filing or the taking of possession or control for a period of 20 days from the time it attaches to the extent that it arises for new value given under a signed security agreement.

(f)A perfected security interest in a negotiable document or goods in possession of a bailee, other than one that has issued a negotiable document for the goods, remains perfected for 20 days without filing if the secured party makes available to the debtor the goods or documents representing the goods for the purpose of either of the following:

(1)Ultimate sale or exchange.

(2)Loading, unloading, storing, shipping, transshipping, manufacturing, processing, or otherwise dealing with them in a manner preliminary to their sale or exchange.

(g)A perfected security interest in a certificated security or instrument remains perfected for 20 days without filing if the secured party delivers the security certificate or instrument to the debtor for the purpose of either of the following:

(1)Ultimate sale or exchange.

(2)Presentation, collection, enforcement, renewal, or registration of transfer.

(h)After the 20-day period specified in subdivision (e), (f), or (g) expires, perfection depends upon compliance with this division.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1981–2022 · leading case: Landmark Land Co., Inc. v. Sprague, 529 F. Supp. 971 (S.D.N.Y. 1981).
Landmark Land Co., Inc. v. Sprague, 529 F. Supp. 971 (S.D.N.Y. 1981). “This rule is given by Cal.Com.Code § 9312(5)(a) which provides in pertinent part: “Conflicting security interests rank according to priority in time of filing or perfection.”
Towers v. Moore (In Re Disanto & Moore Assocs., Inc.), 41 B.R. 935 (N.D. Cal. 1984). “Moreover, the financing statement filed by Wells Fargo on January 18, 1982 would have accorded the bank a security interest with priority superior to that of any “gap” creditor with respect to amounts advanced by Wells Fargo to DiSanto & Moore even after May 12, 1982.”
Textron Fin. Corp. v. Rebel Rents, Inc. (In Re Rebel Rents, Inc.), 307 B.R. 171 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2004). · cites it 2× “See Cal. Com. Code § 9312 (4) (2000) (repealed July 1, 2001).”
Bank of West v. Com. Credit Fin. Servs., Inc., 655 F. Supp. 807 (N.D. Cal. 1987). “Priority Priority between Bank’s and Commercial Credit’s security interests is governed by Cal.Com.Code § 9312(5) (West Supp.1987). Section 9312(5) provides that (a) Conflicting security interests rank according to priority in time of filing or *817 perfection.”
Westamerica Bank, N.A. v. Dep't of Corr. (In Re Com. Reprographics, Inc.), 95 B.R. 174 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 1988). “Cal.Com.Code § 9312(5). The doctrine of equitable subrogation supports the same conclusion.”
Aerocon Eng'g Inc. v. Silicon Valley Bank (In Re World Auxiliary Power Co.), 244 B.R. 149 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 1999). “See Cal. Com.Code § 9312(5)(a). If the Bank’s security interest is unperfected, Aerocon may avoid it under 11 U.”
U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Deseret Farms of California, Inc. (In Re Sargent Walnut Ranches, Inc.), 219 B.R. 880 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 1998). “Cal. Comm.Code § 9312(3). A financier of property who complies with section 9312(3) of the Commercial Code will prime a prior floating lien.”
In Re Sunrise R v. Inc., 107 B.R. 277 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 1989). · cites it 2× “Com.Code § 9312(3), which limits the priority of a PMSI in inventory, cannot, as ITT argues, modify Com.”
Cachet Fin. Servs. v. C&J Assocs., Inc., 373 F. Supp. 3d 1303 (N.D. Cal. 2019). · cites it 2× “" Cal. Com. Code § 9312 (b)(3). Cachet's argument has no merit.”
Carmel Fin., LLC v. Schoenmann (N.D. Cal. 2022). · cites it 4× “” Cal. Com. Code § 9312 (b)(4).5 The Bankruptcy 22 Court, Carmel, and the Trustee agree that a communication, described above and again below, was 23 sent to Philadelphia Indemnity.”
Hoskins v. Profit Recovery Ctr. LLC (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2020). · cites it 3× “See Cal. Comm. Code § 9312 . Section 5 9312(b)(4) provides that a “security interest in, or claim in or 6 under, any policy of insurance, including unearned premiums, may 7 be perfected only by giving written notice of the security 8 interest or claim to the insurer.”
Hoskins v. Profit Recovery Ctr. LLC (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2019). · cites it 2× “She also alleges that Carmel did not notify Insurer 27 that it should be added as a loss payee on the Policy in 28 accordance with California’s law ( Cal. Comm. Code § 9312 (b)(4)) 1 governing the creation and perfection of security interests in 2 insurance policies; she further…”
— Cal. Commercial Code § 9312(3) — 2 cases
U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Deseret Farms of California, Inc. (In Re Sargent Walnut Ranches, Inc.), 219 B.R. 880 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 1998). “Cal. Comm.Code § 9312(3). A financier of property who complies with section 9312(3) of the Commercial Code will prime a prior floating lien.”
In Re Sunrise R v. Inc., 107 B.R. 277 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 1989). “Com.Code § 9312(3), which limits the priority of a PMSI in inventory, cannot, as ITT argues, modify Com.”
— Cal. Commercial Code § 9312(5) — 3 cases
Towers v. Moore (In Re Disanto & Moore Assocs., Inc.), 41 B.R. 935 (N.D. Cal. 1984). “Moreover, the financing statement filed by Wells Fargo on January 18, 1982 would have accorded the bank a security interest with priority superior to that of any “gap” creditor with respect to amounts advanced by Wells Fargo to DiSanto & Moore even after May 12, 1982.”
Bank of West v. Com. Credit Fin. Servs., Inc., 655 F. Supp. 807 (N.D. Cal. 1987). “Priority Priority between Bank’s and Commercial Credit’s security interests is governed by Cal.Com.Code § 9312(5) (West Supp.1987). Section 9312(5) provides that (a) Conflicting security interests rank according to priority in time of filing or *817 perfection.”
Westamerica Bank, N.A. v. Dep't of Corr. (In Re Com. Reprographics, Inc.), 95 B.R. 174 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 1988). “Cal.Com.Code § 9312(5). The doctrine of equitable subrogation supports the same conclusion.”
— Cal. Commercial Code § 9312(5)(a) — 3 cases
Landmark Land Co., Inc. v. Sprague, 529 F. Supp. 971 (S.D.N.Y. 1981). “This rule is given by Cal.Com.Code § 9312(5)(a) which provides in pertinent part: “Conflicting security interests rank according to priority in time of filing or perfection.”
Aerocon Eng'g Inc. v. Silicon Valley Bank (In Re World Auxiliary Power Co.), 244 B.R. 149 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 1999). “See Cal. Com.Code § 9312(5)(a). If the Bank’s security interest is unperfected, Aerocon may avoid it under 11 U.”
Textron Fin. Corp. v. Rebel Rents, Inc. (In Re Rebel Rents, Inc.), 307 B.R. 171 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2004). “See Cal. Com. Code § 9312 (4) (2000) (repealed July 1, 2001).”
— Cal. Commercial Code § 9312(b)(3) — 1 case
Cachet Fin. Servs. v. C&J Assocs., Inc., 373 F. Supp. 3d 1303 (N.D. Cal. 2019). “" Cal. Com. Code § 9312 (b)(3). Cachet's argument has no merit.”
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.