The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has ruled that a lender’s security interest in accounts was not perfected because a reference to “proceeds” in the lender’s UCC financing statement did not expressly refer to “accounts.” The Sixth Circuit surprisingly interpreted the definition of “proceeds”1 in Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code to exclude “accounts”2 (despite and without reference to provisions of UCC Article 9 to the contrary).
USA, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Mayer Brown, Debtor, Collateral (finance), Accounts receivable, Uniform Commercial Code (USA), Sixth Circuit