Skip to main content
Bernstein Burkley
  • Practice Areas
    • Overview
    • Bankruptcy & Restructuring
    • Business and Corporate Transactions
    • Creditors’ Rights
    • Litigation
    • Oil & Gas and Energy
    • Real Estate
  • Our Attorneys
  • About Us
    • Our Approach
    • History
    • Law Lists
    • Professional Memberships
    • Careers
  • Resources
    • Bernstein’s Dictionary of Bankruptcy Terminology
    • Links
    • Five Minute Legal Master videos
    • Blog
    • Legal Publications
  • News
    • Cases Archive
    • Firm News
    • In the News
    • Industry News
  • Contact
CALL - 412 456 8100
Connect
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
Bernstein Burkley
  • Practice Areas
    • Overview
    • Bankruptcy & Restructuring
    • Business and Corporate Transactions
    • Creditors’ Rights
    • Litigation
    • Oil & Gas and Energy
    • Real Estate
  • Our Attorneys
  • About Us
    • Our Approach
    • History
    • Law Lists
    • Professional Memberships
    • Careers
  • Resources
    • Bernstein’s Dictionary of Bankruptcy Terminology
    • Links
    • Five Minute Legal Master videos
    • Blog
    • Legal Publications
  • News
    • Cases Archive
    • Firm News
    • In the News
    • Industry News
  • Contact
Blog
Blog

Consignment Question

Posted on July 30, 2008 by Bob Bernstein

Recently, we published our Client Advisory, including an article on Consignments.  One of our colleagues asked:

Fine article. Question, if you don’t mind: Does the authenticated notification required to be sent by a consignor pursuant to UCC Sec. 9-324(b)(2) need to be sent to other consignors of goods provided to a common consignee for the filing consignor to retain a first priority security interests in its own consigned goods? I would not see why that would be necessary but understand that is common (and burdensom) practice in the jewelry industry. Many thanks.

Without researching it, I think that, as 9103(d) makes a consignment a PMSI and as 9324(b)(2) sets out the steps to deal with a conflicting security interest in those types of collateral, one would have to follow 324 for the protections. To do otherwise, would allow “secret” PMSI’s against conflicting liens, something the Code gets away from. Haven’t seen a case and haven’t researched that point.

Anyone have different answer?

 

 

 

Share on:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

2 thoughts on “Consignment Question”

  1. Steve Jenkins says:
    August 5, 2008 at 6:23 pm

    Bob: I tend to agree since an Article 9 Consignment is deemed a PMSC, to perfect a consignment in the same type of inventory, the holder must give notice to all secured parties claiming a security interest in the same type inventory which would include consignment filings by definition. Also such notice protects both consignors by giving each an oportunity to develope a mewthod of verifying which goods are theirs. Have not seen any cases however.

    Reply
  2. Bankruptcy Type says:
    December 25, 2008 at 6:00 am

    Hi there, I found your blog via Google while searching for bankruptcy type and your post regarding Consignment Question looks very interesting for me

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • Dictionary of Credit Terminology
  • Bernstein’s Dictionary of Bankruptcy Terminology
  • Links
  • Five Minute Legal Master videos
  • Legal Publications
  • All Posts
  • Blog
  • Press Releases
  • Uncategorized

Archives

Bernstein Burkley

Copyright © 2023 Bernstein-Burkley

Links
  • Disclaimer
  • Knowledge Base
  • Privacy Center
  • Site Map

Bernstein-Burkley, P.C.

Phone: 412.456.8100

Fax: 412.456.8135

Email: info@bernsteinlaw.com

Connect