LD 2245
pg. 243
Page 242 of 493 An Act to Adopt the Model Revised Article 9 Secured Transactions Page 244 of 493
Download Bill Text
LR 1087
Item 1

 
paper does not qualify for priority under this section, it may be
subordinate to a perfected-by-filing security interest under
Section 9-322(a)(1) [Maine cite section 9-1322, subsection (1),
paragraph (a)].

 
4. Possession. The priority afforded by this section turns
in part on whether a purchaser "takes possession" of tangible
chattel paper. Similarly, the governing law provisions in
Section 9-301 [Maine cite section 9-1301] address both
"possessory" and "nonpossessory" security interests. Two common
practices have raised particular concerns. First, in some cases
the parties create more than one copy or counterpart of chattel
paper evidencing a single secured obligation or lease. This
practice raises questions as to which counterpart is the
"original" and whether it is necessary for a purchaser to take
possession of all counterparts in order to "take possession" of
the chattel paper. Second, parties sometimes enter into a single
"master" agreement. The master agreement contemplates that the
parties will enter into separate "schedules" from time to time,
each evidencing chattel paper. Must a purchaser of an obligation
or lease evidenced by a single schedule also take possession of
the master agreement as well as the schedule in order to "take
possession" of the chattel paper?

 
The problem raised by the first practice is easily solved.
The parties may in the terms of their agreement and by
designation on the chattel paper identify only one counterpart as
the original chattel paper for purposes of taking possession of
the chattel paper. Concerns about the second practice also are
easily solved by careful drafting. Each schedule should provide
that it incorporates the terms of the master agreement, not the
other way around. This will make it clear that each schedule is
a "stand alone" document.

 
5. Chattel Paper Claimed Merely as Proceeds. Subsection (a)
[Maine cite subsection (1)] revises the rule in former Section 9-
308(b) to eliminate reference to what the purchaser knows.
Instead, a purchaser who meets the possession or control,
ordinary course, and new value requirements takes priority over a
competing security interest unless the chattel paper itself
indicates that it has been assigned to an identified assignee
other than the purchaser. Thus subsection (a) [Maine cite
subsection (1)] recognizes the common practice of placing a
"legend" on chattel paper to indicate that it has been assigned.
This approach, under which the chattel paper purchaser who gives
new value in ordinary course can rely on possession of
unlegended, tangible chattel paper without any concern for other
facts that it may know, comports with the expectations of both
inventory and chattel paper financers.


Page 242 of 493 Top of Page Page 244 of 493