Illinois Compiled Statutes
810 ILCS 5/9-627 (2026)
Determination of whether conduct was commercially reasonable
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(810 ILCS 5/9-627)
Sec. 9-627.
Determination of whether conduct was commercially
reasonable.
(a) Greater amount obtainable under other circumstances; no
preclusion of commercial reasonableness. The fact that a greater amount could
have been obtained by a collection, enforcement, disposition, or acceptance at
a
different time or in a different method from that selected by the secured party
is not
of itself sufficient to preclude the secured party from establishing that the
collection, enforcement, disposition, or acceptance was made in a commercially
reasonable manner.
(b) Dispositions that are commercially reasonable. A disposition
of collateral is made in a commercially reasonable manner if the disposition is
made:
(1) in the usual manner on any recognized market;
(2) at the price current in any recognized market at | the time of the disposition; or |
(3) otherwise in conformity with reasonable | commercial practices among dealers in the type of property that was the subject of the disposition. |
(c) Approval by court or on behalf of creditors. A collection,
enforcement, disposition, or acceptance is commercially reasonable if it has been
approved:
(1) in a judicial proceeding;
(2) by a bona fide creditors' committee;
(3) by a representative of creditors; or
(4) by an assignee for the benefit of creditors.
(d) Approval under subsection (c) not necessary; absence of
approval has no effect. Approval under subsection (c) need not be obtained,
and
lack of approval does not mean that the collection, enforcement, disposition,
or
acceptance is not commercially reasonable.
(Source: P.A. 91-893, eff. 7-1-01.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2013–2023 · leading case: Edgewater Growth Capital Partners LP v. H.I.G. Capital, Inc., 68 A.3d 197 (Del. Ch. 2013).
Edgewater Growth Capital Partners LP v. H.I.G. Capital, Inc., 68 A.3d 197 (Del. Ch. 2013). “’” 83 In turn, 810 ILCS 5/9-627, titled “Determination of whether conduct was commercially reasonable,” provides, in relevant part, that: (b) Dispositions that are commercially reasonable.”
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Smith & Co., Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2023). “810 ILCS 5/9-627, Official Comment 1. RSI’s ultimate price of $75,000 is lower than Sitech’s 70% starting-point price of $290,497, but the court agrees with plaintiff that there is no evidence that RSI failed to act in a commercially reasonable manner in disposing of the first…”
Hildene Opportunities Master Fund, Ltd. v. Holata Micco LLC (N.D. Ill. 2019). “” 810 ILCS 5/9-627(b). Defendants argue that Hildene only relies on the allegedly insufficient price to support its claim, but Hildene alleges that the advertisements used to publicize the foreclosure sale were a commercially unreasonable method of selling bank equity.”
— 810 ILCS 5/9-627(b) — 1 case
Hildene Opportunities Master Fund, Ltd. v. Holata Micco LLC (N.D. Ill. 2019). “” 810 ILCS 5/9-627(b). Defendants argue that Hildene only relies on the allegedly insufficient price to support its claim, but Hildene alleges that the advertisements used to publicize the foreclosure sale were a commercially unreasonable method of selling bank equity.”
— 810 ILCS 5/9-627(b)(3) — 1 case
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Smith & Co., Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2023). “810 ILCS 5/9-627, Official Comment 1. RSI’s ultimate price of $75,000 is lower than Sitech’s 70% starting-point price of $290,497, but the court agrees with plaintiff that there is no evidence that RSI failed to act in a commercially reasonable manner in disposing of the first…”
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.
|