O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 11-9-312 (2019)

Perfection of security interests in chattel paper, deposit accounts, documents, goods covered by documents, instruments, investment property, letter of credit rights, and money; perfection by permissive filing; temporary perfection without filing or transfer of possession

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Perfection by filing permitted. A security interest in chattel paper, negotiable documents, instruments, or investment property may be perfected by filing. (b) Control or possession of certain collateral. Except as otherwise provided in subsections (c) and (d) of Code Section 11-9-315 for proceeds: (1) A security interest in a deposit account may be perfected only by control under Code Section 11-9-314; (2) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d) of Code Section 11-9-308, a security interest in a letter of credit right may be perfected only by control under Code Section 11-9-314; and

(3) A security interest in money may be perfected only by the secured party’s taking possession under Code Section 11-9-313. (c) Goods covered by negotiable document. While goods are in the possession of a bailee that has issued a negotiable document covering the goods: (1) A security interest in the goods may be perfected by perfecting a security interest in the document; and (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) Goods covered by nonnegotiable document. 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: (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; or (3) Filing as to the goods. (e) Temporary perfection; new value. 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 an authenticated security agreement. (f) Temporary perfection; goods or documents made available to debtor. 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: (1) Ultimate sale or exchange; or (2) Loading, unloading, storing, shipping, transshipping, manufacturing, processing, or otherwise dealing with them in a manner preliminary to their sale or exchange. (g) Temporary perfection; delivery of security certificate or instrument to debtor. 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: (1) Ultimate sale or exchange; or

(2) Presentation, collection, enforcement, renewal, or registration of transfer. (h) Expiration of temporary perfection. After the 20 day period specified in subsection (e), (f), or (g) of this Code section expires, perfection depends upon compliance with this article.

History

Code 1981, § 11-9-312, enacted by Ga. L. 2001, p. 362, § 1; Ga. L. 2010, p. 481, § 2-25/HB 451.

Annotations

Editor’s notes. Ga. L. 2010, p. 481, § 3-1/HB 451, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: “This Act applies to a document of title that is issued or a bailment that arises on or after the effective date of this Act. This Act does not apply to a document of title that is issued or a bailment that arises before the effective date of this Act even if the document of title or bailment would be subject to this Act if the document of title had been issued or bailment had arisen on or after the effective date of this Act. This Act does not apply to a right of action that has accrued before

the effective date of this Act.” This Act became effective May 27, 2010. Ga. L. 2010, p. 481, § 3-2/HB 451, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: “A document of title issued or a bailment that arises before the effective date of this Act and the rights, documents, and interests flowing from that document or bailment are governed by any statute or other rule amended or repealed by this Act as if such amendment or repeal had not occurred and may be terminated, completed, consummated, or enforced under that statute or other rule.” This Act became effective May 27, 2010. Law reviews. For article, “Security Transfers by Secured Parties,” see 4 Ga. L. Rev. 527 (1970).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 68A Am. Jur. 2d, Secured Transactions, §§ 18, 38, 51-53, 109, 288 et seq., 304, 310, 311, 445, 448, 455, 495-509, 534-537, 926-930. C.J.S. 6A C.J.S., Assignments, §§ 79, 80, 85. 72 C.J.S., Pledges, § 22. U.L.A. Uniform Commercial Code (U.L.A.) § 9312.

ALR. Effectiveness of original financing statement under UCC Article 9 after change in debtor’s name, identity, or business structure, 99 A.L.R.3d 1194. Perfection of security interests by possession, delivery, or control under revised Article 9 of Uniform Commercial Code, 53 A.L.R.6th 159.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases, 1984–2000 · leading case: Iron Peddlers, Inc. v. Ivie & Assocs., Inc. (In Re Ivie & Assocs., Inc.), 84 B.R. 882 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1988).
Iron Peddlers, Inc. v. Ivie & Assocs., Inc. (In Re Ivie & Assocs., Inc.), 84 B.R. 882 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1988). · cites it 22× “Section 11-9-312(4) is an exception to this general rule.”
In Re Hughes, 230 B.R. 213 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1998). · cites it 15× “Section 11-9-312 of Official Code of Georgia Annotated ("O.”
United States v. Hooks (In Re Hooks), 40 B.R. 715 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1984). · cites it 8× “§ 11-9-312(4), (5)(a), (7) (Michie 1982), which provide: (4) A purchase money security interest in collateral other than inventory has priority over a conflicting security interest in the same collateral or its proceeds if the purchase money security interest is perfected at the…”
Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Valentine Assocs. Ltd., 384 S.E.2d 223 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 5× “After discovery, Borg-Warner moved for summary judgment, claiming that Valentine was negligent in its handling of the transaction and that pursuant to OCGA § 11-9-312 (3), Borg-Warner was merely enforcing its rights as a secured creditor with priority over the Catalina as part…”
Metter Banking Co. v. Fisher Foods, Inc., 359 S.E.2d 145 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 8× “In this light, it is unreasonable to assume the debtor can defeat a perfected prior interest in the sale of his farm products by giving the products themselves to a creditor with a subsequently perfected interest in the products, particularly when that creditor by agreement…”
Tidwell v. Bethlehem Steel Corp. (In Re Georgia Steel, Inc.), 56 B.R. 509 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1985). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 11-9-312(3) (Michie 1982). 14 .”
Corim, Inc. v. Belvin, 414 S.E.2d 491 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 4× “In recognition of that preference, OCGA § 11-9-312 (4) provides: “A purchase money security interest in collateral other than inventory has priority over a conflicting security interest in the same collateral or its proceeds if the purchase money security interest is perfected…”
Orix Credit All., Inc. v. CIT Grp./Equip. Fin., Inc. (In re Hughes), 230 B.R. 213 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1998). · cites it 15× “Section 11-9-312 of Official Code of Georgia Annotated (“O.”
Southtrust Bank of Alabama, Nat'l Ass'n, Formerly Named Birmingham Trust Nat'l Bank v. Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp., a Corp., 760 F.2d 1240 (11th Cir. 1985). “Code § 7-9-312(3) (1975); O.C.G.A. § 11-9-312(3) (1981).”
Crossroads Bank of Georgia v. Corim, Inc., 418 S.E.2d 601 (Ga. 1992). · cites it 3× “judgment were a conflicting security interest within the meaning of Code Section 11-9-312 or an encumbrance within the meaning of Code Section 11-9-313, which conflicting security interest was perfected by filing or which encumbrance arose at the time the tax lien or judgment…”
Paulsen Street Investors v. EBCO Gen. Agencies, 481 S.E.2d 246 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “(f) [t]o a transfer of an interest or claim in or under any policy of insurance, except as provided with respect to proceeds (Code Section 11-9-306) and priorities in proceeds (Code Section 11-9-312).” An assignment of returned or unearned insurance premiums is a security…”
Citizens Bank v. Fed. Fin. Servs., Inc., 509 S.E.2d 339 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “Where conflicting security interests are perfected by the filing of financing statements, 1 the general rule under OCGA § 11-9-312 (5) is that they rank according to priority in time of filing.”
— 11-9-312(3) — 5 cases
Tidwell v. Bethlehem Steel Corp. (In Re Georgia Steel, Inc.), 56 B.R. 509 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1985). “O.C.G.A. § 11-9-312(3) (Michie 1982). 14 .”
Southtrust Bank of Alabama, Nat'l Ass'n, Formerly Named Birmingham Trust Nat'l Bank v. Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp., a Corp., 760 F.2d 1240 (11th Cir. 1985). “Code § 7-9-312(3) (1975); O.C.G.A. § 11-9-312(3) (1981).”
Graniteville Co. v. Bleckley Lumber Co., 687 F. Supp. 589 (M.D. Ga. 1988).
Lee v. Davis/McGraw, Inc. (In Re Lee), 169 B.R. 790 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 1994).
Brooks v. First Franklin Fin. Corp. (In Re Brooks), 74 B.R. 418 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1987).
— 11-9-312(4) — 5 cases
Iron Peddlers, Inc. v. Ivie & Assocs., Inc. (In Re Ivie & Assocs., Inc.), 84 B.R. 882 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1988). “Section 11-9-312(4) is an exception to this general rule.”
United States v. Hooks (In Re Hooks), 40 B.R. 715 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1984). “§ 11-9-312(4), (5)(a), (7) (Michie 1982), which provide: (4) A purchase money security interest in collateral other than inventory has priority over a conflicting security interest in the same collateral or its proceeds if the purchase money security interest is perfected at the…”
In Re Hughes, 230 B.R. 213 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1998). “Section 11-9-312 of Official Code of Georgia Annotated ("O.”
Orix Credit All., Inc. v. CIT Grp./Equip. Fin., Inc. (In re Hughes), 230 B.R. 213 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1998). “Section 11-9-312 of Official Code of Georgia Annotated (“O.”
— 11-9-312(5) — 2 cases
In Re Hughes, 230 B.R. 213 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1998). “Section 11-9-312 of Official Code of Georgia Annotated ("O.”
Orix Credit All., Inc. v. CIT Grp./Equip. Fin., Inc. (In re Hughes), 230 B.R. 213 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1998). “Section 11-9-312 of Official Code of Georgia Annotated (“O.”
— 11-9-312(5)(a) — 2 cases
Iron Peddlers, Inc. v. Ivie & Assocs., Inc. (In Re Ivie & Assocs., Inc.), 84 B.R. 882 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1988). “Section 11-9-312(4) is an exception to this general rule.”
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.