9 C.F.R. § 205.207

“Amount” and “County or parish”

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The “amount” of farm products and “county or parish,” on an EFS and on the master list under subsection (c)(4)(C)(iv) and (2)(C)(iii), need not be shown on every EFS and master list entry.

(b) Any EFS and master list entry will identify a product. If they do not show an amount, this constitutes a representation that all of such product owned by the person in question is subject to the security interest in question.

(c) Any EFS and master list entry will identify each county or parish in the same State where the product is produced or located. If they do not show any further identification of the location of the product, this constitutes a representation that all such product produced in each such county or parish, owned by such person, is subject to the security interest.

(d) The need to supply additional information arises only where some of that product owned by that person is subject to the security interest and some is not.

(e) The additional information about amount must be sufficient to enable a reader of the information to identify what product owned by that person is subject, as distinguished from what of the same product owned by the same person is not subject. The precision needed, in the description of the amount, would vary from case to case.

(f) The basis for this is the purpose of the entire exercise, to make information available as necessary to enable an identification of what product is subject to a security interest as distinguished from what is not.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0580-0016) [51 FR 29451, Aug. 18, 1986, as amended at 71 FR 56343, Sept. 27, 2006]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1995–1995 · leading case: First Nat'l Bank & Trust v. Miami Cnty. Coop. Ass'n, 897 P.2d 144 (Kan. 1995).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

First Nat'l Bank & Trust v. Miami Cnty. Coop. Ass'n, 897 P.2d 144 (Kan. 1995). · cites it 3× “” 9 C.F.R. § 205.207 (b) (1995). Where the financing statement does not show any further location of the product beyond identifying the county or parish where the farm products are located, all such product in each such county or parish, owned by such person, is subject to the…”

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.