Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 409.506 (2026)

Effect of errors or omissions

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

409.506409.506 Effect of errors or omissions.

409.506(1)(1) Minor errors and omissions. A financing statement substantially satisfying the requirements of this subchapter is effective, even if it has minor errors or omissions, unless the errors or omissions make the financing statement seriously misleading.

409.506(2)(2) Financing statement seriously misleading. Except as otherwise provided in sub. (3), a financing statement that fails sufficiently to provide the name of the debtor in accordance with s. 409.503 (1) is seriously misleading.

409.506(3)(3) Financing statement not seriously misleading. If a search of the records of the filing office under the debtor’s correct name, using the filing office’s standard search logic, if any, would disclose a financing statement that fails sufficiently to provide the name of the debtor in accordance with s. 409.503 (1), the name provided does not make the financing statement seriously misleading.

409.506(4)(4) Debtor’s correct name. For purposes of s. 409.508 (2), the “debtor’s correct name” in sub. (3) means the correct name of the new debtor.

409.506 HistoryHistory: 2001 a. 10.

409.506 AnnotationA creditor’s financing statement became “seriously misleading” after the debtors’ name change and so was insufficient to perfect a security interest in property acquired more than four months after the name change. First Agri Services, Inc. v. Kahl, 129 Wis. 2d 464, 385 N.W.2d 191 (Ct. App. 1986).

409.506 AnnotationA wrong statement of section, township, range, and county where crops were grown was not minor, and, without directing further inquiry, was insufficient. Whether a party was misled by the description was not part of the inquiry under s. 409.110 or 409.402. Smith & Spidahl Enterprises, Inc. v. Lee, 206 Wis. 2d 663, 557 N.W.2d 865 (Ct. App. 1996), 96-0882.

409.506 NoteNOTE: The above annotations cite to the pre-2001 Wis. Act 10 version of this chapter.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2001–2018 · leading case: Nat'l Operating, L.P. v. Mut. Life Ins., 2001 WI 87 (Wis. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nat'l Operating, L.P. v. Mut. Life Ins., 2001 WI 87 (Wis. 2001). · cites it 40× “Third, a debtor in default has the right to redeem the collateral under Wis. Stat. § 409.506 . Section 409.506 provides: At any time before the secured party has disposed of collateral or entered into a contract for its disposition under s.”

Rameker v. Farmers State Bank (In Re Lynch), 313 B.R. 798 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 2004). · cites it 2× “In its view, so long as the financing statement is not “seriously misleading,” as defined by Wis. Stat. 409.506, 1 it sufficiently puts third parties on notice of the Bank’s security interest.”

Lanser v. First Bank Fin. Centre (In re Vorobil), 568 B.R. 797 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 2017). · cites it 11× “Minor errors or omissions will not doom a financing statement under Wis. Stat. § 409.506 (1). However, a financing statement is not effective if errors or omissions make it “seriously misleading.”

In re McGough, 592 B.R. 846 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 2018). · cites it 3× “" Wis. Stat. § 409.506 (1). A financing statement is not seriously misleading so long as a search of the filing office's records, using the filing office's standard search logic, reveals the record in question.”

— Wis. Stat. § 409.506(3) — 2 cases

Lanser v. First Bank Fin. Centre (In re Vorobil), 568 B.R. 797 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 2017). “Minor errors or omissions will not doom a financing statement under Wis. Stat. § 409.506 (1). However, a financing statement is not effective if errors or omissions make it “seriously misleading.”

In re McGough, 592 B.R. 846 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 2018). “" Wis. Stat. § 409.506 (1). A financing statement is not seriously misleading so long as a search of the filing office's records, using the filing office's standard search logic, reveals the record in question.”

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.