31st… AND, thus, effect” (attachment) AND “takes “federally perfected” (attachment + on July 31st… step”) “perfection AND, thus, b/c transfer (on July 31st) before rings … “made” “bell” (on August 1st), on is NOT (even though debt IS SI AAP preferential still antecedent) Potential effect of original property IS delayed perfection preferential, BUT is NOT AAP preferential On August 2nd, C makes loan to D, D executes security agreement (w/ D owns equipment1 (original property)… on AAP clause), August 9th, D acquires equipment2 (AAP)… on August 10, “bell” rings… on September 5th, filed… UCC-1 original property IS effect” (attachment) on preferential … “takes August 2nd, BUT perfected” (“perfection 30+ days step”) “federally later on September 5th… BUT, is NOT effect” on August 9th, AAP preferential … “takes AND perfected” within 30 days thereof “federally Foreclosure… 2 kinds of foreclosure in CA… (“JF”) complaint court-supervised sale ordered, Judicial foreclosure D’s liability (debt MINUS sale price) determined deficiency (“NJF”) file (NO lawsuit), file Non-judicial foreclosure notice of default conduct private auction (open to public, but NOT notice of sale, fairly uncommon b/c CA generally protects D from JFs deficiency liability… thus, generally NOT worth the hassle quicker, easier JFs NJFs … AND cheaper If is properly recorded, then foreclosure before bankruptcy would TD likely NOT be b/c foreclosure did NOT make C NO preferential off” “better economic difference b/w selling home in foreclosure sale vs. having on TD home in bankruptcy… BUT, if is NOT properly recorded, then court MAY hold foreclosure TD … right before bankruptcy as being b/c C did NOT have valid preferential lien (would NOT have taken $$ in bankruptcy)…
31st… AND, thus, “takes effect” (attachment) AND “federally perfected” (attachment + “perfection step”) on July 31st… … AND, thus, b/c transfer “made” (on July 31st) before “bell” rings (on August 1st), SI on AAP is NOT preferential (even though debt IS still antecedent) Potential effect of delayed perfection original property IS preferential, BUT AAP is NOT preferential On August 2nd, C makes loan to D, D executes security agreement (w/ AAP clause), D owns equipment1 (original property)… on August 9th, D acquires equipment2 (AAP)… on August 10, “bell” rings… on September 5th, UCC-1 filed… … original property IS preferential “takes effect” (attachment) on August 2nd, BUT “federally perfected” (“perfection step”) 30+ days later on September 5th… … BUT, AAP is NOT preferential “takes effect” on August 9th, AND “federally perfected” within 30 days thereof Foreclosure… 2 kinds of foreclosure in CA… Judicial foreclosure (“JF”) complaint court-supervised sale ordered, D’s deficiency liability (debt MINUS sale price) determined Non-judicial foreclosure (“NJF”) file notice of default (NO lawsuit), file notice of sale, conduct private auction (open to public, but NOT JFs fairly uncommon b/c CA generally protects D from deficiency liability… … thus, JFs generally NOT worth the hassle NJFs quicker, easier AND cheaper If TD is properly recorded, then foreclosure before bankruptcy would likely NOT be preferential b/c foreclosure did NOT make C “better off” NO economic difference b/w selling home in foreclosure sale vs. having TD on home in bankruptcy… … BUT, if TD is NOT properly recorded, then court MAY hold foreclosure right before bankruptcy as being preferential b/c C did NOT have valid lien (would NOT have taken $$ in bankruptcy)…
Bankruptcy_Schechter-Fall-2009.docx