K.S.A. » Chapter 09
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 9-201 (2026)

Repealed

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

9-201.

History: L. 1909, ch. 61, § 1; L. 1921, ch. 73, § 1; R.S. 1923, § 9-201; Repealed, L. 1929, ch. 89, § 1; March 14.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Application of law to national banks considered, but not decided. The State v. Dolley, 82 Kan. 533, 108 P. 846; The State v. Dolley, 83 Kan. 80, 109 P. 992.

2. State law requiring contribution to guaranty fund not unconstitutional. Assaria State Bank v. Dolley, 219 U.S. 121, 31 S. Ct. 189, 55 L. Ed. 123.

3. Law making contribution voluntary may still be police regulation. Assaria State Bank v. Dolley, 219 U.S. 121, 31 S. Ct. 189, 55 L. Ed. 123.

4. Act held constitutional and valid; all objections raised overruled. Assaria State Bank v. Dolley, 219 U.S. 121, 31 S. Ct. 189, 55 L. Ed. 123.

5. Act held not unconstitutional as against national banks. Abilene National Bank v. Dolley, 228 U.S. 1, 33 S. Ct. 409, 57 L. Ed. 707.

6. Statutes do not forbid competitors of national banks to succeed. Abilene National Bank v. Dolley, 228 U.S. 1, 33 S. Ct. 409, 57 L. Ed. 707.

7. General design of law discussed. State, ex rel., v. Bone, 120 Kan. 620, 621, 244 P. 852.

8. Violation of banking laws by bank does not deprive depositors of right. Labette County Comm'rs v. Bone, 120 Kan. 673, 245 P. 123.

9. Certificates of deposit are subject to reformation. Castern v. Kreipe, 125 Kan. 182, 264 P. 55.

10. Repeal of act upheld; return of bonds denied. Smith v. Koenecke, 128 Kan. 805, 280 P. 767.

11. Cited in discussing South Dakota law. State v. Smith, 58 S.D. 22, 234 N.W. 764, 766.

12. Bank-guarantee law and speculative-securities act compared. Meyers v. State Corporation Comm., 139 Kan. 890, 894, 33 P.2d 308.


Previous | Next

www.ksrevisor.gov 2026
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1981–2001 · leading case: Tuloka Affiliates, Inc. v. Sec. State Bank, 627 P.2d 816 (Kan. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tuloka Affiliates, Inc. v. Sec. State Bank, 627 P.2d 816 (Kan. 1981). · cites it 2× “2d 1243 (1978), the court relied on UCC § 9-201 which gives priority to a secured party over anyone, unless such priority is set forth elsewhere in the Code.”
Com. Bank, N.A. v. Chrysler Realty Corp., 76 F. Supp. 2d 1113 (D. Kan. 1999). “1984), in which the Eleventh Circuit applied the general priority rule of UCC § 9-201 and found that a perfected security interest in receivables has priority over setoffs regardless of when the setoffs arise.”
Ag Servs. of Am., Inc. v. DeBruce Grain, Inc., 19 P.3d 188 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001). “Therefore, Farmer still had rights in the collateral at the time the security interest was granted and before delivery, with power to prevail over the competing purchaser under § 9-201.” Clark, The Law of Secured Transactions Under tire Uniform Commercial Code ¶ 8.”
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.