From our private database of 37,200+ case briefs...
Baldwin v. Castro County Feeders I, Ltd.
South Dakota Supreme Court
678 N.W.2d 796 (2004)
Castro County Feeders I, Ltd. (Castro County) (defendant) ran a feedlot operation in Texas in which it contracted to feed and provide vitamins, minerals, and medicine to cattle placed in its lots. Ryan Baldwin (plaintiff) owned and operated a business in Texas specializing in the purchase and sale of cattle. As part of the business, Baldwin often placed his cattle with Castro County. Castro County would feed the livestock for a period and then release the cattle to Baldwin for transport and sale in Kansas. Generally, the sale proceeds were made payable to Baldwin and Castro County to reimburse Castro County for the feed and related services provided to Baldwin’s cattle. Baldwin and Castro County entered into a Cattle Feeding Agreement (Agreement). In the Agreement, the definition of “collateral” generally included all Baldwin’s interest in farm products, limited to livestock, and the future sale of the same, as well as the livestock being “specifically located in Lot(s) # __________ at Castro County Feeders, I, Ltd., Hart, Castro County, Texas.” Baldwin sued Castro County in the South Dakota circuit court regarding Baldwin’s sale of 78 cattle owned by Baldwin in Wagner, South Dakota. The circuit court held that Castro County had a valid security interest in Baldwin’s cattle sold in Wagner and an enforceable security interest in the proceeds of the sale. Baldwin appealed to the South Dakota Supreme Court, arguing that the Agreement failed to sufficiently identify the cattle in question because the Agreement failed to specify the feedlots in which Baldwin’s cattle were located.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Gilbertson, C.J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 629,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 629,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 37,200 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.