Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-9-507 (2026)
Effect of certain events of effectiveness of financing statement
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a)Disposition. 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.
- (b)Information becoming seriously misleading. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c) and § 47-9-508, 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 § 47-9-506.
- (c)Change in debtor's name. If the name that a filed financing statement provides for a debtor becomes insufficient as the name of the debtor under § 47-9-503(a) so that the financing statement becomes seriously misleading under § 47-9-506:
- (1) The financing statement is effective to perfect a security interest in collateral acquired by the debtor before, or within four (4) months after, the filed financing statement becomes seriously misleading; and
- (2) The financing statement is not effective to perfect a security interest in collateral acquired by the debtor more than four (4) months after the filed financing statement becomes seriously misleading, unless an amendment to the financing statement which renders the financing statement not seriously misleading is filed within four (4) months after the financing statement became seriously misleading.
Acts 2000, ch. 846, § 1; 2012, ch. 708, § 14.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1973–2025 · leading case: Davenport v. Chrysler Credit Corp., 818 S.W.2d 23 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991).
Davenport v. Chrysler Credit Corp., 818 S.W.2d 23 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). “Thus, as in cases involving the wrongful disposition of collateral, 6 the Davenports are entitled to set off the deficiency judgment by the amount of their Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-9-507 (1) damages. The record contains sufficient proof to enable us to calculate the parties’ damages.”
Am. City Bank of Tullahoma v. W. Auto Supply Co., 631 S.W.2d 410 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981). “§ 47-9-504(3), infra, and T.C.A. § 47-9-507. 12 The bank claims that the partial sale of the Christmas toys and other seasonal items on November 27, 1978, was unreasonable because Western Auto gave no notice to the bank of the sale.”
Trimble v. Sonitrol of Memphis, Inc., 723 S.W.2d 633 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986). “f § 47-9-504 insofar as they require accounting for surplus proceeds of collateral; (b) subsection (3) of § 47-9-504 and subsection (1) of § 47-9-505 which deal with disposition of collateral; (c) subsection (2) of § 47-9-505 which deals with acceptance of collateral as…”
Pippin Way, Inc. v. Four Star Music Co. (In Re Four Star Music Co.), 2 B.R. 454 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 1979). “T.C.A. § 47-9-507; In Matter of Zsa Zsa, Ltd.”
Jackson Cnty. Bank v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 488 F. Supp. 1001 (M.D. Tenn. 1980). “In some respects a definition of what is a reasonably commercial sale appears in T.C.A. § 47-9-507. The pertinent language is: If the secured party either sells the collateral in the usual manner in any recognized market therefor or if he sells at the price current in such…”
Int'l Harvester Credit Corp. v. Ingram, 619 S.W.2d 134 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981). “However, Ingram’s answer contained an assertion that the collateral was worth “am amount equal to or in excess of” the debt and that the sale conducted as it was caused him “to lose the reasonable value of the equipment for which he has a right to recover under Section 47-9-507…”
Farmers & Merchants Bank v. Dyersburg Prod. Credit Ass'n, 728 S.W.2d 10 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986). “T.C.A. § 47-9-507 (1979) provides in part: § 47-9-507.”
Off. Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Propex Inc. v. BNP Paribas (In Re Propex Inc.), 415 B.R. 321 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2009). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-9-507(c). “[A] financing statement that fails sufficiently to provide the name of the debtor in accordance with § 47-9-503(a) is seriously misleading.”
Chavers v. Frazier (In Re Frazier), 93 B.R. 366 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 1988). “Section 47-9-507(2): If the secured party either sells the collateral in the usual manner in any recognized market therefor or if he sells at the price current in such market at the time of his sale or if he has otherwise sold in conformity with reasonable commercial practices…”
Walker v. Assocs. Com. Corp., 673 S.W.2d 517 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983). “Perhaps evidence can establish other losses that are within the purview of Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-9-507 (1979), and we do not mean to limit proof as to “any loss caused by a failure to comply.”
Farmers State Bank of Parkston v. Otten, 204 N.W.2d 178 (S.D. 1973). “After quoting T.C.A. § 47-9-507 (our SDCL 57-39-17, UCC 9-507(1)), the Supreme Court said the trial judge had not found the value of the collateral so as to determine the debtors' loss, and it remanded the action to the trial court to determine "the amount still due plaintiff…”
Jones v. First Nat. Bank of Pulaski, 505 So. 2d 352 (Ala. 1987). “urity interest governed by the Uniform Commercial Code (1) the creditor must prove he complied with the notice and commercial reasonableness requirements of TCA § 47-9-504(3); (2) if the trial court finds, from all the evidence, that the creditor has not so complied the court…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-9-507(1) — 6 cases
Davenport v. Chrysler Credit Corp., 818 S.W.2d 23 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). “Thus, as in cases involving the wrongful disposition of collateral, 6 the Davenports are entitled to set off the deficiency judgment by the amount of their Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-9-507 (1) damages. The record contains sufficient proof to enable us to calculate the parties’ damages.”
Jones v. First Nat. Bank of Pulaski, 505 So. 2d 352 (Ala. 1987). “urity interest governed by the Uniform Commercial Code (1) the creditor must prove he complied with the notice and commercial reasonableness requirements of TCA § 47-9-504(3); (2) if the trial court finds, from all the evidence, that the creditor has not so complied the court…”
Walker v. Assocs. Com. Corp., 673 S.W.2d 517 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983). “Perhaps evidence can establish other losses that are within the purview of Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-9-507 (1979), and we do not mean to limit proof as to “any loss caused by a failure to comply.”
Int'l Harvester Credit Corp. v. Ingram, 619 S.W.2d 134 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981). “However, Ingram’s answer contained an assertion that the collateral was worth “am amount equal to or in excess of” the debt and that the sale conducted as it was caused him “to lose the reasonable value of the equipment for which he has a right to recover under Section 47-9-507…”
Jacobs v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 638 F. Supp. 214 (E.D. Tenn. 1986).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-9-507(2) — 8 cases
Trimble v. Sonitrol of Memphis, Inc., 723 S.W.2d 633 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986). “f § 47-9-504 insofar as they require accounting for surplus proceeds of collateral; (b) subsection (3) of § 47-9-504 and subsection (1) of § 47-9-505 which deal with disposition of collateral; (c) subsection (2) of § 47-9-505 which deals with acceptance of collateral as…”
Am. City Bank of Tullahoma v. W. Auto Supply Co., 631 S.W.2d 410 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981). “§ 47-9-504(3), infra, and T.C.A. § 47-9-507. 12 The bank claims that the partial sale of the Christmas toys and other seasonal items on November 27, 1978, was unreasonable because Western Auto gave no notice to the bank of the sale.”
Chavers v. Frazier (In Re Frazier), 93 B.R. 366 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 1988). “Section 47-9-507(2): If the secured party either sells the collateral in the usual manner in any recognized market therefor or if he sells at the price current in such market at the time of his sale or if he has otherwise sold in conformity with reasonable commercial practices…”
Pippin Way, Inc. v. Four Star Music Co. (In Re Four Star Music Co.), 2 B.R. 454 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 1979). “T.C.A. § 47-9-507; In Matter of Zsa Zsa, Ltd.”
Int'l Harvester Credit Corp. v. Ingram, 619 S.W.2d 134 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981). “However, Ingram’s answer contained an assertion that the collateral was worth “am amount equal to or in excess of” the debt and that the sale conducted as it was caused him “to lose the reasonable value of the equipment for which he has a right to recover under Section 47-9-507…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-9-507(a) — 2 cases
Greeneville Fed. Bank, FSB v. Fellhoelter (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2021).
Greeneville Fed. Bank, FSB v. First Midwest Equip. Fin. Co. (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2025).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-9-507(c) — 1 case
Off. Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Propex Inc. v. BNP Paribas (In Re Propex Inc.), 415 B.R. 321 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2009). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 47-9-507(c). “[A] financing statement that fails sufficiently to provide the name of the debtor in accordance with § 47-9-503(a) is seriously misleading.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-9-507(l) — 1 case
Davenport v. Chrysler Credit Corp., 818 S.W.2d 23 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991). “Thus, as in cases involving the wrongful disposition of collateral, 6 the Davenports are entitled to set off the deficiency judgment by the amount of their Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-9-507 (1) damages. The record contains sufficient proof to enable us to calculate the parties’ damages.”
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.