Sturtz Machinery, Inc. v. Dove’s Industries, Inc.
United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
83 UCC Rep. Serv. 2d 425 (2014)
- Written by Sheryl McGrath, JD
Facts
Dove’s Industries, Inc. (Dove) (defendant) was a Pennsylvania corporation. Dove had fixtures located in Virginia. Two entities had security interests in Dove’s Virginia fixtures: Sturtz Machinery, Inc. (Sturtz) (plaintiff) and M&T Bank (bank) (defendant). In February 2012, the bank filed a financing statement in Pennsylvania that covered the Virginia fixtures. About six months later, Sturtz filed a financing statement in Virginia and made a separate fixture filing in Virginia. Both of Sturtz’s filings covered the Virginia fixtures. Dove later defaulted, and the fixtures were sold at auction. The bank and Sturtz each claimed to have a priority security interest in the proceeds. Sturtz brought an action in Ohio federal court to determine priority. In the action, the bank filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lioi, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
