Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 409.110 (2026)
Security interests arising under ch
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
409.110409.110 Security interests arising under ch. 402 or 411. A security interest arising under s. 402.401, 402.505, 402.711 (3), or 411.508 (5) is subject to this chapter. However, until the debtor obtains possession of the goods:
409.110(1)(1) The security interest is enforceable, even if s. 409.203 (2) (c) has not been satisfied;
409.110(3)(3) The rights of the secured party after default by the debtor are governed by ch. 402 or 411; and
409.110(4)(4) The security interest has priority over a conflicting security interest created by the debtor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1978–2000 · leading case: Matter of Younce, 56 B.R. 232 (E.D. Wis. 1985).
Matter of Younce, 56 B.R. 232 (E.D. Wis. 1985). “The primary question presented in this bankruptcy appeal is whether the description in a security agreement and related financing statement of certain real estate on which the debtors’ crops are located is sufficient under Wis.Stat. § 409.110 to create a perfected security…”
Smith & Spidahl Enter., Inc. v. Lee, 557 N.W.2d 865 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996). “The court concluded that Ag-Tech's security interest was unperfected and the bank's security interest was perfected, providing the bank with the right to the 1994 crop proceeds. The trial court deter *667 mined that, while the description of the land in Ag-Tech's security…”
Am. Honda Fin. Corp. v. Cilek (In Re Cilek), 115 B.R. 974 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 1990). “Judge Shabaz found that the description, “all farm personal property” approached the “super-generic”, failed to reasonably identify anything claimed by the creditor and provided no more notice than no description.”
Milwaukee MacK Sales, Inc. v. First Wisconsin Nat'l Bank of Milwaukee, 287 N.W.2d 708 (Wis. 1980). “” The Official Uniform Commercial Code Comment to sec. 409.110 notes that: “The requirement of description of collateral (see Section 9-203 and Comment thereto) is evidentiary.”
United States v. Fullpail Cattle Sales, Inc., 640 F. Supp. 976 (E.D. Wis. 1986). “§ 9-110 (codified in Wisconsin at Wis.Stat. § 409.110). Cattle described by erroneous ear tag number have been held to be “reasonably identified” in a security agreement description.”
Nat'l Acceptance Co. v. Doede, 78 F.R.D. 333 (W.D. Wis. 1978). “The test for determining the adequacy of a security agreement description of collateral is set forth in Wis.Stat. § 409.110: “For the purposes of this chapter any description of personal property or real estate is sufficient whether or not it is specific if it reasonably…”
Matter of Younce, 44 B.R. 102 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 1984). “§ 409.110. For the purposes of this chapter any description of personal property or real estate is sufficient whether or not it is specific if it reasonably identifies what is described.”
Becker v. Bank of Barron (In Re Becker), 53 B.R. 450 (W.D. Wis. 1985). “” Further, § 409.110 provides: For the purposes of this chapter a description of personal property or real estate is sufficient whether or not it is specific if it reasonably identifies what is described.”
Sampson Investments v. Sampson, 111 F. Supp. 2d 1064 (E.D. Wis. 2000). “§ 409.110. 9 . Because the security interests of Bank One and Participants are senior to that of Heritage, the scope of Heritage’s security interest is irrelevant, as is the fact that the Heritage agreement preceded the Government’s tax lien.”
Kepler v. Prod. Credit Ass'n (In re Godfrey), 59 B.R. 232 (W.D. Wis. 1986). “The test of sufficiency of a description laid down by this section is that the description do the job assigned to it — that it make possible the identification of the thing described. Under this rule courts should refuse to follow the holdings, often found in the older chattel…”
Matter of Godfrey, 59 B.R. 232 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 1986). “The test of sufficiency of a description laid down by this section is that the description do the job assigned to it that it make possible the identification of the thing described. Under this rule courts should refuse to follow the holdings, often found in the older chattel…”
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.