Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 75-9-402 (2026)
Secured party not obligated on contract of debtor or in tort
✓ current as of July 2026
The existence of a security interest, agricultural lien, or authority given to a debtor to dispose of or use collateral, without more, does not subject a secured party to liability in contract or tort for the debtor's acts or omissions.
Former 1972 Code § 75-9-402 [Codes, 1942, § 41A:9-402; Laws, 1966, ch. 316, § 9-402; Laws, 1968, ch. 490, § 1; Laws, 1977, ch. 452, § 25, eff. 4/1/1978] is now found in comparable provisions enacted at §§ 75-9-502, 75-9-503, 75-9-504, 75-9-506, 75-9-507, 75-9-512, and 75-9-521 by Laws, 2001, ch. 495, § 1. Present § 75-9-402 was derived from former 1972 Code § 75-9-317 [Codes, 1942, § 41A:9-317; Laws, 1966, ch. 316, § 9-317, eff. 3/31/1968] and was enacted by Laws, 2001, ch. 495, § 1, eff. 1/1/2002.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases, 1975–2004 · leading case: In the Matter of Rex L. Hammons, Bankrupts. Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Fedders Fin. Corp., 614 F.2d 399 (5th Cir. 1980).
In the Matter of Rex L. Hammons, Bankrupts. Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Fedders Fin. Corp., 614 F.2d 399 (5th Cir. 1980). “Under Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(5) a financing statement that lists the debtor’s name incorrectly will still be effective if the error does not cause it to be seriously misleading.”
In Re Abell, 66 B.R. 375 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 1986). “These two sections, set forth hereinbelow, provide how and when a secured party may continue perfection of a security interest both prior and subsequent to a lapse of perfection, resulting from the expiration of the five year effectiveness period.”
TXG Intrastate Pipeline Co. v. Grossnickle, 716 So. 2d 991 (Miss. 1997). “These agreements satisfy the formal requirements for a financing statement as set forth in Miss. Code Ann. § 75-9-402 (1972). Milmac's security interest in the production and proceeds from the Smith Well became perfected when it took possession beginning in April 1991.”
In the Matter of Bufkin Bros., Inc., Bankrupt. Multi-Mart Branch Off., First State Bank v. Appliance Buyers Credit Corp., 757 F.2d 1573 (1st Cir. 1985). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(8). In addition to our holding that Appliance’s signature substantially complied with the requirements of section 9-402, we also hold that the absence of a handwritten signature in this particular case was not seriously misleading.”
Pongetti v. Deposit Guar. Nat'l Bank (In Re Strickland), 94 B.R. 898 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 1988). “Strickland, as required by Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402 (1972). The names “Strickland Builders Mfg.”
Bankrupt Est. v. S. Trailer Distributors, Inc., 508 F.2d 1323 (5th Cir. 1975). “Miss.Code Ann. 75-9-402(1). Here the financing statement filed by Southern Trailer Distributors, Inc.”
WEST IMPLEMENT Co., INC. v. First South Prod. Credit Ass'n, 815 So. 2d 1164 (Miss. 2002). “Again, Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402 provides in part: (1) A financing statement is sufficient if it gives the names of the debtor and the secured party, is signed by the debtor, gives an address of the secured party from which information concerning the security interest may be…”
First Bank v. E. Livestock Co., 837 F. Supp. 792 (S.D. Miss. 1993). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(8). Thus, the Fifth Circuit has concluded that Mississippi would adopt the view of the majority of courts that a description is adequate if it merely provides notice of the need for additional inquiry.”
United States v. Se. Mississippi Livestock Farmers Ass'n, 619 F.2d 435 (5th Cir. 1980). “Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402 (1972) (amended 1977): (1) A financing statement is sufficient if it is signed by the debtor and the secured party, gives an address of the secured party from which information concerning the security interest may be obtained, gives a mailing address of…”
Baddour, Inc. v. United States, 614 F. Supp. 159 (N.D. Miss. 1985). “Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402 (1972) (U.C.C. filing statement reflects security interest in goods; not a demonstration of ownership).”
Hilburn v. S. Trailer Distributors, Inc., 508 F.2d 1323 (5th Cir. 1975). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(1). However, “A financing statement substantially complying with the requirements of .”
U.S. Small Bus. Admin. v. Guar. Bank & Trust Co., 874 F.2d 997 (5th Cir. 1989). “We note in passing that Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402 requires the financing statement to contain the name and signature of the debtor.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 75-9-402(1) — 4 cases
Bankrupt Est. v. S. Trailer Distributors, Inc., 508 F.2d 1323 (5th Cir. 1975). “Miss.Code Ann. 75-9-402(1). Here the financing statement filed by Southern Trailer Distributors, Inc.”
WEST IMPLEMENT Co., INC. v. First South Prod. Credit Ass'n, 815 So. 2d 1164 (Miss. 2002). “Again, Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402 provides in part: (1) A financing statement is sufficient if it gives the names of the debtor and the secured party, is signed by the debtor, gives an address of the secured party from which information concerning the security interest may be…”
United States v. Se. Mississippi Livestock Farmers Ass'n, 619 F.2d 435 (5th Cir. 1980). “Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402 (1972) (amended 1977): (1) A financing statement is sufficient if it is signed by the debtor and the secured party, gives an address of the secured party from which information concerning the security interest may be obtained, gives a mailing address of…”
Hilburn v. S. Trailer Distributors, Inc., 508 F.2d 1323 (5th Cir. 1975). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(1). However, “A financing statement substantially complying with the requirements of .”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 75-9-402(2) — 1 case
In Re Abell, 66 B.R. 375 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 1986). “These two sections, set forth hereinbelow, provide how and when a secured party may continue perfection of a security interest both prior and subsequent to a lapse of perfection, resulting from the expiration of the five year effectiveness period.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 75-9-402(4) — 1 case
In Re Abell, 66 B.R. 375 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 1986). “These two sections, set forth hereinbelow, provide how and when a secured party may continue perfection of a security interest both prior and subsequent to a lapse of perfection, resulting from the expiration of the five year effectiveness period.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 75-9-402(5) — 3 cases
In the Matter of Rex L. Hammons, Bankrupts. Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Fedders Fin. Corp., 614 F.2d 399 (5th Cir. 1980). “Under Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(5) a financing statement that lists the debtor’s name incorrectly will still be effective if the error does not cause it to be seriously misleading.”
Bankrupt Est. v. S. Trailer Distributors, Inc., 508 F.2d 1323 (5th Cir. 1975). “Miss.Code Ann. 75-9-402(1). Here the financing statement filed by Southern Trailer Distributors, Inc.”
Hilburn v. S. Trailer Distributors, Inc., 508 F.2d 1323 (5th Cir. 1975). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(1). However, “A financing statement substantially complying with the requirements of .”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 75-9-402(7) — 1 case
In the Matter of Rex L. Hammons, Bankrupts. Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Fedders Fin. Corp., 614 F.2d 399 (5th Cir. 1980). “Under Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(5) a financing statement that lists the debtor’s name incorrectly will still be effective if the error does not cause it to be seriously misleading.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 75-9-402(8) — 2 cases
In the Matter of Bufkin Bros., Inc., Bankrupt. Multi-Mart Branch Off., First State Bank v. Appliance Buyers Credit Corp., 757 F.2d 1573 (1st Cir. 1985). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(8). In addition to our holding that Appliance’s signature substantially complied with the requirements of section 9-402, we also hold that the absence of a handwritten signature in this particular case was not seriously misleading.”
First Bank v. E. Livestock Co., 837 F. Supp. 792 (S.D. Miss. 1993). “” Miss.Code Ann. § 75-9-402(8). Thus, the Fifth Circuit has concluded that Mississippi would adopt the view of the majority of courts that a description is adequate if it merely provides notice of the need for additional inquiry.”
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.