Second Nat. Bank of Danville v. Massey-Ferguson Credit Corp., MASSEY-FERGUSON

Decision Date04 June 1985
Docket NumberNo. 4-884A218,MASSEY-FERGUSON,4-884A218
Citation478 N.E.2d 916
PartiesThe SECOND NATIONAL BANK OF DANVILLE, Danville, Illinois, a national banking association, Appellant (Plaintiff below), v.CREDIT CORPORATION, Appellee (Defendant below). 1
CourtIndiana Appellate Court

R. David Bray, White, White & Bray, Covington, for appellant.

Christopher Kirages, John W. Porter, Dutton & Overman, Indianapolis, for appellee.

ROBERTSON, Judge.

Plaintiff-appellant Second National Bank of Danville (Second National) appeals from the decision of the Warren Circuit Court entering summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee Massey-Ferguson Credit Corporation (Massey-Ferguson).

We affirm.

A synopsis of the facts shows a priority dispute between two secured creditors. Second National had a security interest in certain personal property owned by Foster's of Indiana, Inc. (Foster's), including all machinery and equipment owned or subsequently acquired by Foster's. On November 10, 1978, Second National perfected its security interest by filing a financing statement in the office of the recorder of Fountain County and in the office of the Secretary of State.

Massey-Ferguson had a security interest in a combine and grain table purchased by Foster's in 1981. On December 8, 1981, Massey-Ferguson filed a financing statement in the recorder's office in Fountain County.

Second National brought suit to foreclose its security interest in the personal property owned by Foster's. Massey-Ferguson claimed a superior interest in the combine and grain table based on a perfected purchase money security interest. Both Second National and Massey-Ferguson filed motions for summary judgment. The trial court granted Massey-Ferguson's motion for summary judgment, and Second National appealed.

One issue is dispositive of this appeal: Whether the trial court erred as a matter of law in concluding that Massey-Ferguson complied with the filing requirements of IND.CODE Sec. 26-1-9-401 (1976).

Summary judgment is appropriate where there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Ind.Rules of Procedure, Trial Rule 56. Where the parties agree there is no factual dispute, as in the instant case, the task of the appellate court is to determine whether the lower court correctly applied the law. Tilbury v. City of Fort Wayne, (1984) Ind.App., 471 N.E.2d 1183, 1185; Poole v. Corwin, (1983) Ind.App., 447 N.E.2d 1150, 1151. Second National challenges the trial court's application of IND.CODE Sec. 26-1-9-401 (1976).

IND.CODE Sec. 26-1-9-401(1)(a) (1976) provided:

The proper place to file in order to perfect a security interest is as follows: When the collateral is equipment used in farming operations, or farm products, or accounts, contract rights or general intangibles arising from or relating to the sale of farm products by a farmer, or consumer goods, then in the office of the county recorder in the county of the debtor's residence or if the debtor is not a resident of this state then in the office of the county recorder in the county where the principal place of business of the corporation is located, and in the office of the Secretary of State....

The trial court determined that Massey-Ferguson complied with the terms of this statutory provision. The collateral, a combine and grain table, constituted equipment used in farming operations. Foster's, the debtor, was located in Fountain County. Massey-Ferguson filed its financing statement in the office of the Fountain County recorder.

Second National contends that the statute required filing in a manner other than that done by Massey-Ferguson, because the statute as written was ambiguous. Second National proposes that the legislature intended for secured creditors of corporate debtors to file locally and in the office of the Secretary of State. To support that argument, Second National relies principally on the language of I.C. 26-1-9-401 as enacted prior to its amendment in 1971:

The proper place to file in order to perfect a security interest is as follows: When the collateral is equipment used in farming operations, or farm products, or accounts, contract rights or general intangibles arising from or relating to the sale of farm products by a farmer, or consumer goods, then in the office of the county recorder in the county of the debtor's residence or if the debtor is not a resident of this state...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Dow-Par, Inc. v. Lee Corp., DOW-PA
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • December 12, 1994
    ...of equipment is best left in the hands of the Legislature whose power we will not usurp. See Second National Bank of Danville v. Massey-Ferguson Credit (1985), Ind.App., 478 N.E.2d 916, 918. Thus, we find that I.C. 36-1-12-13.1 which provides for the payment of those who work on public work......
  • Ashlin Transp. Services, Inc. v. Indiana Unemployment Ins. Bd.
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • June 29, 1994
    ...of a statute by the addition of words or phrases encroaches upon the legislative function. Second National Bank of Danville v. Massey-Ferguson Credit Corp. (1985), Ind.App., 478 N.E.2d 916, 918. "In construing a statute, it is just as important to recognize what a statute does not say as it......
  • State ex rel. Indiana State Bd. of Dental Examiners v. Judd
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • June 6, 1990
    ...our task is to determine whether the trial court correctly applied the law to the undisputed facts. Second Nat. Bank v. Massey-Ferguson Credit (1985), Ind.App., 478 N.E.2d 916. Judd graduated from dental school and obtained a license to practice dentistry in 1972. He practiced until Septemb......
  • Laux v. Chopin Land Associates, Inc., 90A02-9302-CV-45
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • June 21, 1993
    ...there is no factual dispute, our task is to determine whether the trial court correctly applied the law, Second Nat. Bank v. Massey-Ferguson Credit (1985), Ind.App., 478 N.E.2d 916, 917. B. Both parties attempt to characterize what has happened below in terms which are not entirely accurate......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT