Okla. Stat. » Title 12A — UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312 (2026)

Repealed by Laws 2000, c. 371, § 185, eff. July 1,

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

2001.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases, 1966–2004 · leading case: Georgia-Pac. Corp. v. Lumber Prods. Co., 590 P.2d 661 (Okla. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Georgia-Pac. Corp. v. Lumber Prods. Co., 590 P.2d 661 (Okla. 1979). · cites it 2× “As all three of the creditors perfected by filing and as no special provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code are applicable in the case before us, the priorities between the three conflicting security interests are governed by the provisions of 12A O.S.1971, § 9-312(5) which…”
Morton Booth Co. v. Tiara Furniture, Inc., 564 P.2d 210 (Okla. 1977). “Under 12A O.S.1971, § 9-312(3), purchase money security interests in inventory collateral have priority over conflicting security interests in the same goods, if: “(a) the purchase money security interest is perfected at the time the debtor receives possession of the collateral;…”
Am. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. Nat'l Cash Register Co., 473 P.2d 234 (Okla. 1970). · cites it 3× “Title 12A O.S.1961, § 9-312 (4) provides that a purchase money security interest in collateral other than inventory has priority over a conflicting security interest in the same collateral if the purchase money security interest is perfected at the time the debtor receives…”
Sec. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. of Norman v. Dentsply Prof'l Plan, 617 P.2d 1340 (Okla. 1980). “12A O.S.1971 § 9-312(5), UCC comment 4, example 1; First National Bank and Trust Co.”
Consol. Equip. Sales, Inc. v. First State Bank & Trust Co. of Guthrie, 627 P.2d 432 (Okla. 1981). “12A O.S.1971 § 9-312(5)(a), 306(2). 8 Failure to so act is a conversion.”
Liberty Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. of Oklahoma City v. Garcia, 686 P.2d 303 (Okla. Civ. App. 1984). “Id at 591. See also 12A O.S.1981 § 9-302(3). The Oklahoma Legislature has adopted the “race diligence” approach in both the Uniform Commercial Code and the Certificates of Title provisions of Title 47.”
Kennett-Murray & Co. v. Pawnee Nat'l Bank, 598 P.2d 274 (Okla. Civ. App. 1979). “We observe, however, that through the simple expedient of taking and perfecting a purchase money security interest under 12A O.S.1971, § 9-312(3), Kennett-Murray could have acquired a substantial measure of protection against, as well as priority over, the security interests of…”
Mitchell Coach Mfg. Co. v. Stephens, 19 F. Supp. 2d 1227 (N.D. Okla. 1998). “See 12A O.S. § 9-312(3); Tex.Bus. & Com.Code § 9.”
United States v. One 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass VD 1GAM47A4CM453310, 709 F. Supp. 1542 (W.D. Okla. 1989). · cites it 5× “Claimant next asserts that its contractual security interest in the Defendant vehicle based not only on the security agreement and note dated July 27, 1983 but on the notes executed on April 27, 1984 and December 5, 1984 was valid and existing before the illegal act of Patel on…”
Stillwater Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. CIT Grp./Equip. Fin., Inc., 383 F.3d 1148 (10th Cir. 2004). “See Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312. CIT’s purported retention of title to the Subject Equipment until Sabre remitted payment pursuant to the Repurchase Agreement does not change the result in this case.”
Bank of Oklahoma, City Plaza v. Martin, 744 P.2d 218 (Okla. Civ. App. 1987). “In cases not governed by other rules, 12A O.S.1981 § 9-312(5)(a) provides that conflicting security interests in the same collateral shall be determined according to priority in time of perfection.”
Williams v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. of Vinita, 482 P.2d 595 (Okla. 1971). “12A O.S.1961, § 9-312(5) (a). The question dispositive of this appeal, as we understand the parties’ briefs, is the effect of the prior verbal agreement between the Bank and Williams in view of 12A O.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312(1) — 1 case
Nat'l Trailer Convoy Co. v. Mount Vernon Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 420 P.2d 889 (Okla. 1966).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312(3) — 4 cases
Morton Booth Co. v. Tiara Furniture, Inc., 564 P.2d 210 (Okla. 1977). “Under 12A O.S.1971, § 9-312(3), purchase money security interests in inventory collateral have priority over conflicting security interests in the same goods, if: “(a) the purchase money security interest is perfected at the time the debtor receives possession of the collateral;…”
Kennett-Murray & Co. v. Pawnee Nat'l Bank, 598 P.2d 274 (Okla. Civ. App. 1979). “We observe, however, that through the simple expedient of taking and perfecting a purchase money security interest under 12A O.S.1971, § 9-312(3), Kennett-Murray could have acquired a substantial measure of protection against, as well as priority over, the security interests of…”
Mitchell Coach Mfg. Co. v. Stephens, 19 F. Supp. 2d 1227 (N.D. Okla. 1998). “See 12A O.S. § 9-312(3); Tex.Bus. & Com.Code § 9.”
In Re La Selle's Bicycle World, 120 B.R. 579 (Bankr. N.D. Okla 1990).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312(3)(b) — 1 case
In Re La Selle's Bicycle World, 120 B.R. 579 (Bankr. N.D. Okla 1990).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312(3)(d) — 1 case
ITT Diversified Credit Corp. v. Daniels (In Re Daniels), 35 B.R. 247 (Bankr. W.D. Okla. 1983).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312(4) — 2 cases
Liberty Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. of Oklahoma City v. Garcia, 686 P.2d 303 (Okla. Civ. App. 1984). “Id at 591. See also 12A O.S.1981 § 9-302(3). The Oklahoma Legislature has adopted the “race diligence” approach in both the Uniform Commercial Code and the Certificates of Title provisions of Title 47.”
Am. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. Nat'l Cash Register Co., 473 P.2d 234 (Okla. 1970). “Title 12A O.S.1961, § 9-312 (4) provides that a purchase money security interest in collateral other than inventory has priority over a conflicting security interest in the same collateral if the purchase money security interest is perfected at the time the debtor receives…”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312(5) — 5 cases
Georgia-Pac. Corp. v. Lumber Prods. Co., 590 P.2d 661 (Okla. 1979). “As all three of the creditors perfected by filing and as no special provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code are applicable in the case before us, the priorities between the three conflicting security interests are governed by the provisions of 12A O.S.1971, § 9-312(5) which…”
Sec. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. of Norman v. Dentsply Prof'l Plan, 617 P.2d 1340 (Okla. 1980). “12A O.S.1971 § 9-312(5), UCC comment 4, example 1; First National Bank and Trust Co.”
Williams v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. of Vinita, 482 P.2d 595 (Okla. 1971). “12A O.S.1961, § 9-312(5) (a). The question dispositive of this appeal, as we understand the parties’ briefs, is the effect of the prior verbal agreement between the Bank and Williams in view of 12A O.”
First Bethany Bank & Trust, N.A. v. Arvest United Bank, 2003 OK 64 (Okla. 2003).
United States v. One 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass VD 1GAM47A4CM453310, 709 F. Supp. 1542 (W.D. Okla. 1989). “Claimant next asserts that its contractual security interest in the Defendant vehicle based not only on the security agreement and note dated July 27, 1983 but on the notes executed on April 27, 1984 and December 5, 1984 was valid and existing before the illegal act of Patel on…”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312(5)(a) — 2 cases
Consol. Equip. Sales, Inc. v. First State Bank & Trust Co. of Guthrie, 627 P.2d 432 (Okla. 1981). “12A O.S.1971 § 9-312(5)(a), 306(2). 8 Failure to so act is a conversion.”
Bank of Oklahoma, City Plaza v. Martin, 744 P.2d 218 (Okla. Civ. App. 1987). “In cases not governed by other rules, 12A O.S.1981 § 9-312(5)(a) provides that conflicting security interests in the same collateral shall be determined according to priority in time of perfection.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 9-312(7) — 1 case
United States v. One 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass VD 1GAM47A4CM453310, 709 F. Supp. 1542 (W.D. Okla. 1989). “Claimant next asserts that its contractual security interest in the Defendant vehicle based not only on the security agreement and note dated July 27, 1983 but on the notes executed on April 27, 1984 and December 5, 1984 was valid and existing before the illegal act of Patel on…”
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.