Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

In re Schley

509 B.R. 901 (2014)

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

In re Schley

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Iowa

509 B.R. 901 (2014)


Gary and Julie Schley (debtors) owned a pair of pig-farming sites. They filed an adversary proceeding within their bankruptcy to settle the question of priority between three creditors as to $209,412.24 in receipts from the sale of the Schleys’ livestock. Cooperative Credit Company (CCC) (creditor) obtained a perfected security interest first. In 2004, it entered a security agreement with the Schleys that granted it a security interest in collateral including livestock. CCC promptly filed a financing statement covering the same collateral and filed a timely continuation statement, keeping its interest in full effect. In 2008 and 2009, Peoples Bank (creditor) made $1.36 million in loans to the Schleys and also took a security interest in their livestock and proceeds, which Peoples Bank perfected by filing a financing statement. The Schleys purchased feed for their pigs in February and March 2010 from two suppliers, one of which was Watonwan Farm Service (WFS) (creditor). WFS had a security agreement granting it an interest in inventory and proceeds, also perfected by filing of a financing statement. Peoples Bank paid certain amounts to WFS in 2010 on the Schleys’ accounts. In June 2010, the Schleys sold some of their pigs for $209,412.24 in total, which was promptly deposited by the Schleys into an escrow account. The Schleys filed bankruptcy in December 2010. CCC and Peoples Bank sought a determination of priority over WFS. WFS argued that it had an agricultural lien under Iowa statute. The Iowa law provided that an agricultural supply dealer has an agricultural lien as to livestock consuming the feed it has supplied, except that the lien does not apply to livestock of a farmer who paid all amounts due for the feed. Factually, it was unclear whether the pigs sold had indeed consumed the WFS feed. It was also unclear whether, and to what extent, Peoples Bank’s payments had covered the feed bill for the pigs that were sold. Bank and CCC argued that the agricultural lien should not apply, because another statute, that which regarded proceeds as a continuation of a security interest, provided that a security interest (but not expressly including an agricultural lien) applied to identifiable proceeds of collateral.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Collins, 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 620,000 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 620,000 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 620,000 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