Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 355
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.9-204 (2026)

After-acquired property -- Future advances

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2) of this section, a security agreement may create or provide for a security interest in after-acquired collateral.

(2) (a) Subject to paragraph (b) of this subsection, a security interest does not attach under a term constituting an after-acquired property clause to:

1. Consumer goods, other than an accession when given as additional security, unless the debtor acquires rights in them within ten (10) days after the secured party gives value; or

2. A commercial tort claim.

(b) Paragraph (a) of this subsection does not prevent a security interest from attaching: 1. To consumer goods as proceeds under KRS 355.9-315(1) or commingled goods under KRS 355.9-336(3); 2. To a commercial tort claim as proceeds under KRS 355.9-315(1); or

3. Under an after-acquired property clause to property that is proceeds of consumer goods or a commercial tort claim.

(3) A security agreement may provide that collateral secures, or that accounts, chattel paper, payment intangibles, or promissory notes are sold in connection with, future advances or other value, whether or not the advances or value are given pursuant to commitment. Effective: January 1, 2025 History: Amended 2024 Ky. Acts ch. 10, sec. 51, effective January 1, 2025. -- Repealed and reenacted 2000 Ky. Acts ch. 408, sec. 34, effective July 1, 2001. -- Amended 1986 Ky. Acts ch. 118, sec. 61, effective July 1, 1987. -- Created 1958 Ky. Acts ch. 77, sec. 9-204, effective July 1, 1960.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1961–2022 · leading case: Mammoth Cave Prod. Credit Ass'n v. York, 429 S.W.2d 26 (Ky. Ct. App. 1968).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mammoth Cave Prod. Credit Ass'n v. York, 429 S.W.2d 26 (Ky. Ct. App. 1968). · cites it 2× “n (including cases of purchase money security interests which do not qualify for the special priorities set forth in subsections (3) and (4) of this section), priority between conflicting security interest in the same collateral shall be determined as follows: (a) in the order…”
Harris Trust & Sav. Bank v. Wathen's Elevators, Inc. (In Re Wathen's Elevators, Inc.), 32 B.R. 912 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1983). “KRS 355.9-204(1). Finally, the security interest was properly filed and thereby perfected, making it enforceable against third parties.”
Bank of Lexington v. Jack Adams Aircraft Sales, Inc., 570 F.2d 1220 (5th Cir. 1978). “Because the Federal Aviation Act incorporates Kentucky law on the issue of the validity of the security interest, the Kentucky UCC should be the source of that reference. The UCC does not require, in the strict common law sense, that consideration be given as a prerequisite for…”
ITT Indus. Credit Co. v. Union Bank & Trust Co., 615 S.W.2d 2 (Ky. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 2× “9-204(5) reads, “[obligations covered by a security agreement may include future advances or other value whether or not the advances or value are given pursuant to commitment.”
Peoples Sec. Fin., Inc. v. Aldrich (In Re Aldrich), 16 B.R. 825 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1982). “KRS 355.9-204(5) provides: “(5) Obligations covered by a security agreement may include future advances or other value whether or not the advances or value are given pursuant to commitment.”
Empire Fin. Co. of Louisville, Inc. v. Ewing, 558 S.W.2d 619 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977). “Appellant argues that the court erred in finding that it had violated the TILA by failing to indicate on its disclosure statement that the security interest it retained in the appellee’s household furniture attached only to furniture already owned or acquired by him within 10…”
First Bancorp, Inc. v. United States, 945 F. Supp. 2d 802 (W.D. Ky. 2013). · cites it 4× “In regard to after-acquired property, the official comments to UCC § 9-204 (which corresponds to Ky. Rev.Stat. § 355.9-204) advises: The effect of after-acquired property and future advance clauses as components of a security agreement should not be confused with the…”
In re Purdy, 490 B.R. 530 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2013). “KRS 355.9-204. Sunshine in its post-hearing briefs states that CFB’s claim to post-petition milk proceeds is limited to the “milk produced by the cows subject to its security interest and not from cows subject to the Sunshine Heifers leases.”
Kaiser Agric. Chemicals v. Beaver Dam Grain, Inc. (In Re Beaver Dam Grain, Inc.), 43 B.R. 283 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1984). · cites it 2× “at the time it signed the security agreement and financing statement.”
First Nat'l Bank of Grayson v. Citizens Deposit Bank & Bank, 735 S.W.2d 328 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987). “Such clauses are permitted by KRS 355.9-204(5). Thus, the security agreement was never released because C & M did in fact continue to borrow from First Bank, and never abated its indebtedness to First Bank.”
Hutchison v. C.I.T. Corp., 576 F. Supp. 1 (W.D. Ky. 1982). “-9-204 and whether it attached before or after filing; (b) in the order of perfection unless both are perfected by filing, regardless of which security interest attached first under subsection (1) of KRS 355.9-204 and, in the case of a filed security interest, whether it…”
In Re Hopper, 17 B.R. 292 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1982). “Now, Credithrift argues that it did not accept the amended plan and received no notice of the proposed avoidance of its lien on household goods until receipt of the order entered July 25, 1980.”
Show all 25 citing cases →
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.9-204(1): 6 cases
Harris Trust & Sav. Bank v. Wathen's Elevators, Inc. (In Re Wathen's Elevators, Inc.), 32 B.R. 912 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1983). “KRS 355.9-204(1). Finally, the security interest was properly filed and thereby perfected, making it enforceable against third parties.”
Mammoth Cave Prod. Credit Ass'n v. York, 429 S.W.2d 26 (Ky. Ct. App. 1968). “n (including cases of purchase money security interests which do not qualify for the special priorities set forth in subsections (3) and (4) of this section), priority between conflicting security interest in the same collateral shall be determined as follows: (a) in the order…”
Kaiser Agric. Chemicals v. Beaver Dam Grain, Inc. (In Re Beaver Dam Grain, Inc.), 43 B.R. 283 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1984). “at the time it signed the security agreement and financing statement.”
Am. Pulverizer Co. v. Cantrell, 694 S.W.2d 714 (Ky. Ct. App. 1985).
Nutrien Ag Solutions, Inc., Successor to Sec. v. Duvall (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2021).
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.9-204(3): 4 cases
Mammoth Cave Prod. Credit Ass'n v. York, 429 S.W.2d 26 (Ky. Ct. App. 1968). “n (including cases of purchase money security interests which do not qualify for the special priorities set forth in subsections (3) and (4) of this section), priority between conflicting security interest in the same collateral shall be determined as follows: (a) in the order…”
Versailles Farm, Home & Garden, LLC v. Harvey Haynes (Ky. Ct. App. 2021).
Malone v. Maxwell, 557 S.W.2d 908 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).
Versailles Farm, Home & Garden, LLC v. Harvey Haynes (Ky. 2022).
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.9-204(4)(b): 1 case
Empire Fin. Co. of Louisville, Inc. v. Ewing, 558 S.W.2d 619 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977). “Appellant argues that the court erred in finding that it had violated the TILA by failing to indicate on its disclosure statement that the security interest it retained in the appellee’s household furniture attached only to furniture already owned or acquired by him within 10…”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.9-204(5): 8 cases
ITT Indus. Credit Co. v. Union Bank & Trust Co., 615 S.W.2d 2 (Ky. Ct. App. 1981). “9-204(5) reads, “[obligations covered by a security agreement may include future advances or other value whether or not the advances or value are given pursuant to commitment.”
Peoples Sec. Fin., Inc. v. Aldrich (In Re Aldrich), 16 B.R. 825 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1982). “KRS 355.9-204(5) provides: “(5) Obligations covered by a security agreement may include future advances or other value whether or not the advances or value are given pursuant to commitment.”
First Nat'l Bank of Grayson v. Citizens Deposit Bank & Bank, 735 S.W.2d 328 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987). “Such clauses are permitted by KRS 355.9-204(5). Thus, the security agreement was never released because C & M did in fact continue to borrow from First Bank, and never abated its indebtedness to First Bank.”
In Re Hopper, 17 B.R. 292 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1982). “Now, Credithrift argues that it did not accept the amended plan and received no notice of the proposed avoidance of its lien on household goods until receipt of the order entered July 25, 1980.”
In Re Harris, 17 B.R. 210 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1982).
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.