Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 440 / Act 174 of 1962
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9304 (2026)

Law governing perfection and priority of security interests in deposit accounts.

✓ 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


440.9304 Law governing perfection and priority of security interests in deposit accounts.

Sec. 9304.

    (1) The local law of a bank's jurisdiction governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and the priority of a security interest in a deposit account maintained with that bank.

    (2) The following rules determine a bank's jurisdiction for purposes of this part:

    (a) If an agreement between the bank and the debtor governing the deposit account expressly provides that a particular jurisdiction is the bank's jurisdiction for the purpose of this part, this article, or this act, that jurisdiction is the bank's jurisdiction.

    (b) If subdivision (a) does not apply and an agreement between the bank and its customer governing the deposit account expressly provides that the agreement is governed by the law of a particular jurisdiction, that jurisdiction is the bank's jurisdiction.

    (c) If neither subdivision (a) nor (b) applies and an agreement between the bank and its customer governing the deposit account expressly provides that the deposit account is maintained at an office in a particular jurisdiction, that jurisdiction is the bank's jurisdiction.

    (d) If none of the preceding subdivisions apply, the bank's jurisdiction is the jurisdiction in which the office identified in an account statement as the office serving the customer's account is located.

    (e) If none of the preceding subdivisions apply, the bank's jurisdiction is the jurisdiction in which the chief executive office of the bank is located.

History: 1962, Act 174, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 369, Eff. Jan. 1, 1979 ;-- Am. 1987, Act 16, Imd. Eff. Apr. 24, 1987 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 278, Imd. Eff. July 27, 1998 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 488, Imd. Eff. Jan. 4, 1999 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 348, Eff. July 1, 2001

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1973–2008 · leading case: Prime Fin. Servs. LLC v. Vinton, 761 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Prime Fin. Servs. LLC v. Vinton, 761 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 3× “MCL 440.9304(1). 8 And the perfected status remained only as long as the secured party retained possession.”
McTevia v. Adamo (In Re Atl. Mortg. Corp.), 69 B.R. 321 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1987). “§ 440.9304(1). The trustee’s rights under 11 U.”
Frank v. ITT Com. Fin. Corp. (In Re Thompson Boat Co.), 230 B.R. 815 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1995). · cites it 2× “See Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9304 (1). But ITT’s contention that the reserve account is money does not withstand scrutiny.”
Matter of Skyland, Inc., 28 B.R. 354 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1983). “§ 440.9304(4)] even though the owner resided in Michigan and his chief place of business was located there.”
Shurlow v. Bonthuis, 553 N.W.2d 366 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996). “MCL 440.9304(1); MSA 19.9304(1). If the secured party fails to file the financing statement, the security interest behind the lien remains unperfected, and it will be subordinated to other security interests or types of creditors.”
In re Forfeiture of $126,174, 479 N.W.2d 8 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “Furthermore, Clarke has failed to show any relevant sections of the code pertaining to his assignment of Martin’s rights in the funds seized by the Tri-County Metro Narcotics Squad. The recording provisions of the code apply to security interests, with a security interest in…”
Nat. Bank of Detroit v. Eames & Brown, Inc., 213 N.W.2d 573 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 2× “See: MCLA 440.9304(5); MSA 19.9304(5), and MCLA 440.”
Robinson v. Hyatt (In re Hyatt), 26 B.R. 162 (E.D. Mich. 1983). “§ 440.9304(3). This section deals with perfecting security interest in goods in the possession of a bailee.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9304(1) — 3 cases
Prime Fin. Servs. LLC v. Vinton, 761 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “MCL 440.9304(1). 8 And the perfected status remained only as long as the secured party retained possession.”
McTevia v. Adamo (In Re Atl. Mortg. Corp.), 69 B.R. 321 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1987). “§ 440.9304(1). The trustee’s rights under 11 U.”
Shurlow v. Bonthuis, 553 N.W.2d 366 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996). “MCL 440.9304(1); MSA 19.9304(1). If the secured party fails to file the financing statement, the security interest behind the lien remains unperfected, and it will be subordinated to other security interests or types of creditors.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9304(3) — 1 case
Robinson v. Hyatt (In re Hyatt), 26 B.R. 162 (E.D. Mich. 1983). “§ 440.9304(3). This section deals with perfecting security interest in goods in the possession of a bailee.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9304(4) — 2 cases
Prime Fin. Servs. LLC v. Vinton, 761 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “MCL 440.9304(1). 8 And the perfected status remained only as long as the secured party retained possession.”
Matter of Skyland, Inc., 28 B.R. 354 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1983). “§ 440.9304(4)] even though the owner resided in Michigan and his chief place of business was located there.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9304(5) — 1 case
Nat. Bank of Detroit v. Eames & Brown, Inc., 213 N.W.2d 573 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). “See: MCLA 440.9304(5); MSA 19.9304(5), and MCLA 440.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9304(6) — 1 case
Nat. Bank of Detroit v. Eames & Brown, Inc., 213 N.W.2d 573 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). “See: MCLA 440.9304(5); MSA 19.9304(5), and MCLA 440.”
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.