Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Bank of Beaver City v. Barretts' Livestock

295 P.3d 1088 (2012)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...

Bank of Beaver City v. Barretts’ Livestock

Oklahoma Supreme Court

295 P.3d 1088 (2012)

Facts

Bank of Beaver City (bank) (plaintiff) perfected a security interest in the livestock of Lucky Moon Land and Livestock, Inc. (Lucky Moon), including all after-acquired livestock, on August 9, 2004. In late 2009, Barretts’ Livestock, Inc. (Barretts) (defendant) sold and delivered 903 head of cattle to Lucky Moon. Lucky Moon made two payments toward its balance and then wrote four checks to partially satisfy the remaining balance. The bank dishonored the checks due to insufficient funds. The bank and Barretts each claimed an interest in the cattle, which were sold at auction with the proceeds held in escrow pending a resolution of the priority situation. The bank filed suit, seeking judgment that it had priority based on its perfected security interest. Barretts did not have a perfected security interest but argued that it should take priority because the bank had not acted in good faith toward Barretts because the bank kept covering overdrafts by Lucky Moon despite knowledge of Lucky Moon’s financial struggles. Oklahoma’s Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) extended a duty of good faith from a lender to a debtor. Barretts submitted that it would not have delivered the cattle if it had known that the bank would not honor the checks in question. At trial, the bank’s motion for summary judgment was granted, with the court finding that the bank’s perfected security interest had priority over the unperfected security interest held by Barretts. Barretts appealed and argued that the bank’s interest had not attached because the bank was not a good-faith purchaser for value, and also that the bank had failed to act in good faith toward Barretts. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s ruling, but the bank appealed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which granted certiorari to address whether a UCC requirement of good faith extended to third parties.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kauger, J.)

Dissent (Gurich, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 618,000 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
  2. 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 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 35,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership