Tex. Codes » Business & Commerce Code · TITLE 1. UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE · CHAPTER 9. SECURED TRANSACTIONS
Texas Codes

Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 9.108 (2026)

Sufficiency Of Description

✓ laws through the 89th Legislature (2025)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 9.108. SUFFICIENCY OF DESCRIPTION. (a) Except as otherwise provided in Subsections (c), (d), and (e), a description of personal or real property is sufficient, whether or not it is specific, if it reasonably identifies what is described.

(b) Except as otherwise provided in Subsection (d), a description of collateral reasonably identifies the collateral if it identifies the collateral by:

(1) specific listing;

(2) category;

(3) except as otherwise provided in Subsection (e), a type of collateral defined in this title;

(4) quantity;

(5) computational or allocational formula or procedure; or

(6) except as otherwise provided in Subsection (c), any other method, if the identity of the collateral is objectively determinable.

(c) A description of collateral as "all the debtor's assets" or "all the debtor's personal property" or using words of similar import does not reasonably identify the collateral.

(d) Except as otherwise provided in Subsection (e), a description of a security entitlement, securities account, or commodity account is sufficient if it describes:

(1) the collateral by those terms or as investment property; or

(2) the underlying financial asset or commodity contract.

(e) A description only by type of collateral defined in this title is an insufficient description of:

(1) a commercial tort claim; or

(2) in a consumer transaction, consumer goods, a security entitlement, a securities account, or a commodity account.

Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 414, Sec. 1.01, eff. July 1, 2001.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2013–2014 · leading case: CERx Pharmacy Partners, LP v. Provider Meds, LP (In re Providerx of Grapevine, LLC), 507 B.R. 132 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
CERx Pharmacy Partners, LP v. Provider Meds, LP (In re Providerx of Grapevine, LLC), 507 B.R. 132 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2014). “” See Tex. Bus. Com.Code § 9.108 cmt. 2. Therefore, this Court holds, as a matter of law, that PM granted CERx a security interest in its IP Assets and that such interest attached to the IP Assets in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Texas UCC.”
CERx Pharmacy Partners, LP v. Provider Meds, LP (In re Providerx of Grapevine, LLC), 498 B.R. 118 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2013). “” See Tex. Bus. Com.Code § 9.108 cmt. 2. Therefore, this Court holds, as a matter of law, that PM granted CERx a security interest in its IP Assets and that such interest attached to the IP Assets in accordance with the provisions of the Texas UCC.”
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.