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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9507 (2026)

Effect of certain events on effectiveness of financing statement.

✓ 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


440.9507 Effect of certain events on effectiveness of financing statement.

Sec. 9507.

    (1) A filed financing statement remains effective with respect to collateral that is sold, exchanged, leased, licensed, or otherwise disposed of and in which a security interest or agricultural lien continues, even if the secured party knows of or consents to the disposition.

    (2) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3) and section 9508, a financing statement is not rendered ineffective if, after the financing statement is filed, the information provided in the financing statement becomes seriously misleading under section 9506.

    (3) If the name that a filed financing statement provides for a debtor becomes insufficient as the name of the debtor under section 9503(1) so that the financing statement becomes seriously misleading under section 9506, both of the following apply:

    (a) The financing statement is effective to perfect a security interest in collateral acquired by the debtor before, or within 4 months after, the filed financing statement becomes seriously misleading.

    (b) The financing statement is not effective to perfect a security interest in collateral acquired by the debtor more than 4 months after the filed financing statement becomes seriously misleading, unless an amendment to the financing statement that renders the financing statement not seriously misleading is filed within 4 months after the financing statement became seriously misleading.

History: 1962, Act 174, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 348, Eff. July 1, 2001 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 88, Eff. July 1, 2013

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1974–2008 · leading case: Wilson Leasing Co. v. Seaway Pharmacal Corp., 220 N.W.2d 83 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wilson Leasing Co. v. Seaway Pharmacal Corp., 220 N.W.2d 83 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 4× “[6] MCLA 440.9507(1); MSA 19.9507(1). [7] MCLA 440.”
Prime Fin. Servs. LLC v. Vinton, 761 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “9504(1) (c) (requiring the secured party to dispose of collateral in a commercially reasonable manner and to pay any surplus to junior lienholders) and MCL 440.9507(1) (granting other secured parties the *276 right to hold a secured party hable for losses occasioned by the…”
Jones v. Morgan, 228 N.W.2d 419 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 2× “The jury’s finding that plaintiff acted reasonably also determines defendant’s argument that he was entitled to recovery on his counterclaim under UCC 9-507; MCLA 440.9507; MSA 19.9507. This statute provides the remedy available to a debtor, the right to recover damages when a…”
Apfelblat v. Nat'l Bank Wyandotte-Taylor, 404 N.W.2d 725 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). “This argument is precluded by MCL 440.9507(2); MSA 19.9507(2). Under this statute, disposition of collateral in a judicially approved manner is conclusively presumed to be commercially reasonable.”
In Re Andersen, 50 B.R. 137 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1985). · cites it 2× “” Mich.Comp.Laws § 440.9507(1) states: “If it is established that the secured party is not proceeding in accordance *139 with the provisions of this part disposition may be ordered or restrained on appropriate terms and conditions.”
Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Traffic Transp. Eng'g, Inc., 388 N.W.2d 281 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “Defendant first asserts that the trial court erred in ruling that under MCL 440.9507(2); MSA 19.9507(2) the defendant could not collaterally attack in state court the commercial reasonableness of the sales of the trailers that were made under the authority of the United States…”
Honor State Bank v. Timber Wolf Constr. Co., 391 N.W.2d 442 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “MCL 440.9507(1); MSA 19.9507(1) states in part: If it is established that the secured party is not proceeding in accordance with the provisions of this part disposition may be ordered or restrained on appropriate terms and conditions.”
Bennett v. Wright, 263 N.W.2d 17 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). “9101 through MCLA 440.9507; MSA 19.9507.”
State Bank v. Keysor, 419 N.W.2d 752 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). “We believe that a party’s failure to comply with the notice and sale provisions of UCC 9-504, which triggers liability under UCC 9-507 (MCL 440.9507; MSA 19.9507), triggers the secured party’s liability but such is not truly a liability for conversion and the applicable period…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9507(1) — 5 cases
Prime Fin. Servs. LLC v. Vinton, 761 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “9504(1) (c) (requiring the secured party to dispose of collateral in a commercially reasonable manner and to pay any surplus to junior lienholders) and MCL 440.9507(1) (granting other secured parties the *276 right to hold a secured party hable for losses occasioned by the…”
Wilson Leasing Co. v. Seaway Pharmacal Corp., 220 N.W.2d 83 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974). “[6] MCLA 440.9507(1); MSA 19.9507(1). [7] MCLA 440.”
Jones v. Morgan, 228 N.W.2d 419 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975). “The jury’s finding that plaintiff acted reasonably also determines defendant’s argument that he was entitled to recovery on his counterclaim under UCC 9-507; MCLA 440.9507; MSA 19.9507. This statute provides the remedy available to a debtor, the right to recover damages when a…”
In Re Andersen, 50 B.R. 137 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1985). “” Mich.Comp.Laws § 440.9507(1) states: “If it is established that the secured party is not proceeding in accordance *139 with the provisions of this part disposition may be ordered or restrained on appropriate terms and conditions.”
Honor State Bank v. Timber Wolf Constr. Co., 391 N.W.2d 442 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “MCL 440.9507(1); MSA 19.9507(1) states in part: If it is established that the secured party is not proceeding in accordance with the provisions of this part disposition may be ordered or restrained on appropriate terms and conditions.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.9507(2) — 3 cases
Wilson Leasing Co. v. Seaway Pharmacal Corp., 220 N.W.2d 83 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974). “[6] MCLA 440.9507(1); MSA 19.9507(1). [7] MCLA 440.”
Apfelblat v. Nat'l Bank Wyandotte-Taylor, 404 N.W.2d 725 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). “This argument is precluded by MCL 440.9507(2); MSA 19.9507(2). Under this statute, disposition of collateral in a judicially approved manner is conclusively presumed to be commercially reasonable.”
Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Traffic Transp. Eng'g, Inc., 388 N.W.2d 281 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “Defendant first asserts that the trial court erred in ruling that under MCL 440.9507(2); MSA 19.9507(2) the defendant could not collaterally attack in state court the commercial reasonableness of the sales of the trailers that were made under the authority of the United States…”
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.