Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9303 (2026)

Law governing perfection and priority of security interests in goods covered by certificate of title.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE

Act 174 of 1962

440.9303 Law governing perfection and priority of security interests in goods covered by certificate of title.

Sec. 9303.

(1) This section applies to goods covered by a certificate of title, even if there is no other relationship between the jurisdiction under whose certificate of title the goods are covered and the goods or the debtor.

(2) Goods become covered by a certificate of title when a valid application for the certificate of title and the applicable fee are delivered to the appropriate authority. Goods cease to be covered by a certificate of title at the earlier of the time the certificate of title ceases to be effective under the law of the issuing jurisdiction or the time the goods become covered subsequently by a certificate of title issued by another jurisdiction.

(3) The local law of the jurisdiction under whose certificate of title the goods are covered governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and the priority of a security interest in goods covered by a certificate of title from the time the goods become covered by the certificate of title until the goods cease to be covered by the certificate of title.

History: 1962, Act 174, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 278, Imd. Eff. July 27, 1998 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 348, Eff. July 1, 2001

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1973–2024 · leading case: Yamaha Motor Corp., USA v. Tri-City Motors & Sports, Inc., 429 N.W.2d 871 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Yamaha Motor Corp., USA v. Tri-City Motors & Sports, Inc., 429 N.W.2d 871 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 5× “MCL 440.9303, 440.9401; MSA 19.9303, 19.9401.”

NBD-Sandusky Bank v. Ritter, 446 N.W.2d 340 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 6× “To claim priority over NBD-Sandusky Bank, John Deere Company's purchase money security interest must have been perfected within twenty days after this date. Security interests are perfected when two events occur: (1) the interest must "attach," and (2) the creditor must have…”

Nat'l Bank v. Eames & Brown, Inc., 242 N.W.2d 412 (Mich. 1976). “MCLA 440.9303(1) says a security interest "is perfected when it has attached and when all of the applicable steps required for perfection have been taken”.”

Cont'l Oil Co. v. Citizens Trust & Sav. Bank, 244 N.W.2d 243 (Mich. 1976). “IV — Conclusion We hold that where a secured creditor has actual knowledge of a change in the debtor’s name, and where that change is seriously misleading, the secured creditor is required to make a good faith attempt to refile or amend the financing statement to reflect the…”

Michigan Tractor & Mach. Co. v. Elsey, 549 N.W.2d 27 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996). “Under UCC 9-303(1), MCL 440.9303(1): MSA 19.9303(1), “[a] security interest is perfected when it has attached and when ah of the apphcable steps required for perfection have been taken.”

NBD-Sandusky Bank v. Ritter, 471 N.W.2d 340 (Mich. 1991). “MCL 440.9303(1); MSA 19.9303(1) specifically provides "[i]f such steps [for perfection] are *363 taken before the security interest attaches, it is perfected at the time when it attaches.”

McLeod v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (In Re McLeod), 245 B.R. 518 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2000). · cites it 2× “See Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 440.9303 (1). The filing of a financial statement is only required to protect against a subsequent sale to a buyer for value and without knowledge, an exception that is not applicable in this case.”

Nauman v. First Nat'l Bank, 212 N.W.2d 760 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). “9302 and, by so perfecting them within 10 days (MCLA 440.9303; MSA 19.9303), obtained priority over any conflicting security interests in the same collateral.”

Nat. Bank of Detroit v. Eames & Brown, Inc., 213 N.W.2d 573 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 2× “MCLA 440.9303; MSA 19.9303, regarding perfection.”

BMO Bank N.A. v. D H Trucking Inc. (E.D. Mich. 2024). · cites it 2× “9102 (“‘Security agreement’ means an agreement that creates or provides for a security interest”); Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9303 (stating that perfection of a security interest in a vehicle results when the interest is recorded on the certificate of title); Mich.”

Gochá v. Ford Motor Credit (In Re Vega), 323 B.R. 656 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2005). · cites it 2× “§ 440.9303. This section governs perfection and priority of security interests in goods “covered by a certificate of title, even if there is no other relationship between the jurisdiction under whose certificate of title the goods are covered and the goods or the debtor.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9303(1) — 5 cases

NBD-Sandusky Bank v. Ritter, 446 N.W.2d 340 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “To claim priority over NBD-Sandusky Bank, John Deere Company's purchase money security interest must have been perfected within twenty days after this date. Security interests are perfected when two events occur: (1) the interest must "attach," and (2) the creditor must have…”

Gochá v. Ford Motor Credit (In Re Vega), 323 B.R. 656 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2005). “§ 440.9303. This section governs perfection and priority of security interests in goods “covered by a certificate of title, even if there is no other relationship between the jurisdiction under whose certificate of title the goods are covered and the goods or the debtor.”

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.