reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
CO Code § 4-9-209 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 2 - Effectiveness of Security Agreement; Attachment of Security Interest; Rights of Parties to Security Agreement|§ 4-9-209. Duties of Secured Party if Account Debtor Has Been Notified of Assignment

  Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c) of this section, this section applies if:   There is no outstanding secured obligation; and    The secured party is not committed to make advances, incur obligations, or otherwise give value.       Within ten days after receiving an authenticated demand by the debtor, a secured party shall send to an account debtor that has received notification of an assignment to the secured party as assignee under section 4-9-406 (a) an authenticated record that releases the account debtor from any further obligation to the secured party.    This section does not apply to an assignment constituting the sale of an account, chattel paper, or payment intangible.     History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1340, § 1, effective July 1.    OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. New.   2. Scope and Purpose. Like Sections 9-208 and 9-513, which require a secured party to relinquish control of collateral and to file or provide a termination statement for a financing statement, this section requires a secured party to free up collateral when there no longer is any outstanding secured obligation or any commitment to give value in the future. This section addresses the case in which account debtors have been notified to pay a secured party to whom the receivables have been assigned. It requires the secured party (assignee) to inform the account debtors that they no longer are obligated to make payment to the secured party. See subsection (b). It does not apply to account debtors whose obligations on an account, chattel paper, or payment intangible have been sold. See subsection (c).
CO Code § 4-9-302 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 3 - Perfection and Priority|§ 4-9-302. Law Governing Perfection and Priority of Agricultural Liens

 While farm products are located in a jurisdiction, the local law of that jurisdiction governs perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and the priority of an agricultural lien on the farm products.   History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1342, § 1, effective July 1.    OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. New.   2. Agricultural Liens. This section provides choice-of-law rules for agricultural liens on farm products. Perfection, the effect of perfection or nonperfection, and priority all are governed by the law of the jurisdiction in which the farm products are located. Other choice-of-law rules, including Section 1-301, determine which jurisdiction's law governs other matters, such as the secured party's rights on default. See Section 9-301, Comment 2. Inasmuch as no agricultural lien on proceeds arises under this Article, this section does not expressly apply to proceeds of agricultural liens. However, if another statute creates an agricultural lien on proceeds, it may be appropriate for courts to apply the choice-of-law rule in this section to determine priority in the proceeds.
CO Code § 4-9-321 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 3 - Perfection and Priority|§ 4-9-321. Licensee of General Intangible and Lessee of Goods in Ordinary Course of Business

  In this section, “licensee in ordinary course of business” means a person that becomes a licensee of a general intangible in good faith, without knowledge that the license violates the rights of another person in the general intangible, and in the ordinary course from a person in the business of licensing general intangibles of that kind. A person becomes a licensee in the ordinary course if the license to the person comports with the usual or customary practices in the kind of business in which the licensor is engaged or with the licensor's own usual or customary practices.    A licensee in ordinary course of business takes its rights under a nonexclusive license free of a security interest in the general intangible created by the licensor, even if the security interest is perfected and the licensee knows of its existence.    A lessee in ordinary course of business takes its leasehold interest free of a security interest in the goods created by the lessor, even if the security interest is perfected and the lessee knows of its existence.     History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1357, § 1, effective July 1.    Editor's note:   The provisions of this section are similar to former §§ 4-2.5-103 (1)(o) and 4-2.5-307 (3) as they existed prior to 2001.   OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. Derived from Sections 2A-103(1)(o), 2A-307(3).   2. Licensee in Ordinary Course. Like the analogous rules in Section 9-320(a) with respect to buyers in ordinary course and subsection (c) with respect to lessees in ordinary course, the new rule in subsection (b) reflects the expectations of the parties and the marketplace: a licensee under a nonexclusive license takes subject to a security interest unless the secured party authorizes the license free of the security interest or other, controlling law such as that of this section (protecting ordinary-course licensees) dictates a contrary result. See Sections 9-201, 9-315. The definition of “licensee in ordinary course of business” in subsection (a) is modeled upon that of “buyer in ordinary course of business.”   3. Lessee in Ordinary Course. Subsection (c) contains the rule formerly found in Section 2A-307(3). The rule works in the same way as that of Section 9-320(a).
CO Code § 4-9-337 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 3 - Perfection and Priority|§ 4-9-337. Priority of Security Interests in Goods Covered by Certificate of Title

 If, while a security interest in goods is perfected by any method under the law of another jurisdiction, this state issues a certificate of title that does not show that the goods are subject to the security interest or contain a statement that they may be subject to security interests not shown on the certificate:    A buyer of the goods, other than a person in the business of selling goods of that kind, takes free of the security interest if the buyer gives value and receives delivery of the goods after issuance of the certificate and without knowledge of the security interest; and    The security interest is subordinate to a conflicting security interest in the goods that attaches, and is perfected under section 4-9-311 (b), after issuance of the certificate and without the conflicting secured party's knowledge of the security interest.     History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1369, § 1, effective July 1.    OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. Derived from former Section 9-103(2)(d).   2. Protection for Buyers and Secured Parties. This section affords protection to certain good-faith purchasers for value who are likely to have relied on a “clean” certificate of title, i.e., one that neither shows that the goods are subject to a particular security interest nor contains a statement that they may be subject to security interests not shown on the certificate. Under this section, a buyer can take free of, and the holder of a conflicting security interest can acquire priority over, a security interest that is perfected by any method under the law of another jurisdiction. The fact that the security interest has been reperfected by possession under Section 9-313 does not of itself disqualify the holder of a conflicting security interest from protection under paragraph (2).
CO Code § 4-9-338 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 3 - Perfection and Priority|§ 4-9-338. Priority of Security Interest or Agricultural Lien Perfected by Filed Financing Statement Providing Certain Incorrect Information

 If a security interest or agricultural lien is perfected by a filed financing statement providing information described in section 4-9-516 (b)(5) which is incorrect at the time the financing statement is filed:    The security interest or agricultural lien is subordinate to a conflicting perfected security interest in the collateral to the extent that the holder of the conflicting security interest gives value in reasonable reliance upon the incorrect information; and    A purchaser, other than a secured party, of the collateral takes free of the security interest or agricultural lien to the extent that, in reasonable reliance upon the incorrect information, the purchaser gives value and, in the case of tangible chattel paper, tangible documents, goods, instruments, or a security certificate, receives delivery of the collateral.     History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1369, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2006: (2) amended, p. 502, § 43, effective September 1.    OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. New.   2. Effect of Incorrect Information in Financing Statement. Section 9-520(a) requires the filing office to reject financing statements that do not contain information concerning the debtor as specified in Section 9-516(b)(5). An error in this information does not render the financing statement ineffective. On rare occasions, a subsequent purchaser of the collateral (i.e., a buyer or secured party) may rely on the misinformation to its detriment. This section subordinates a security interest or agricultural lien perfected by an effective, but flawed, financing statement to the rights of a buyer or holder of a perfected security interest to the extent that, in reasonable reliance on the incorrect information, the purchaser gives value and, in the case of tangible collateral, receives delivery of the collateral. A purchaser who has not made itself aware of the information in the filing office with respect to the debtor cannot act in “reasonable reliance” upon incorrect information.   3. Relationship to Section 9-507. This section applies to financing statements that contain information that is incorrect at the time of filing and imposes a small risk of subordination on the filer. In contrast, Section 9-507 deals with financing statements containing information that is correct at the time of filing but which becomes incorrect later. Except as provided in Section 9-507 with respect to changes in the name that is sufficient as the name of the debtor under Section 9-503 (a), an otherwise effective financing statement does not become ineffective if the information contained in it becomes inaccurate.
CO Code § 4-9-339 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 3 - Perfection and Priority|§ 4-9-339. Priority Subject to Subordination

 This article does not preclude subordination by agreement by a person entitled to priority.   History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1370, § 1, effective July 1.    Editor's note:   This section is similar to former § 4-9-316 as it existed prior to 2001.   OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. Former Section 9-316.   2. Subordination by Agreement. The preceding sections deal elaborately with questions of priority. This section makes it entirely clear that a person entitled to priority may effectively agree to subordinate its claim. Only the person entitled to priority may make such an agreement: a person's rights cannot be adversely affected by an agreement to which the person is not a party.
CO Code § 4-9-340 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 3 - Perfection and Priority|§ 4-9-340. Effectiveness of Right of Recoupment or Set-Off Against Deposit Account

  Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c) of this section, a bank with which a deposit account is maintained may exercise any right of recoupment or set-off against a secured party that holds a security interest in the deposit account.    Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c) of this section, the application of this article to a security interest in a deposit account does not affect a right of recoupment or set-off of the secured party as to a deposit account maintained with the secured party.    The exercise by a bank of a set-off against a deposit account is ineffective against a secured party that holds a security interest in the deposit account which is perfected by control under section 4-9-104 (a)(3), if the set-off is based on a claim against the debtor.     History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1370, § 1, effective July 1.    OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. New; subsection (b) is based on a nonuniform Illinois amendment.   2. Set-off vs. Security Interest. This section resolves the conflict between a security interest in a deposit account and the bank's rights of recoupment and set-off.   Subsection (a) states the general rule and provides that the bank may effectively exercise rights of recoupment and set-off against the secured party. Subsection (c) contains an exception: if the secured party has control under Section 9-104(a)(3) (i.e., if it has become the bank's customer), then any set-off exercised by the bank against a debt owed by the debtor (as opposed to a debt owed to the bank by the secured party) is ineffective. The bank may, however, exercise its recoupment rights effectively. This result is consistent with the priority rule in Section 9-327(4), under which the security interest of a bank in a deposit account is subordinate to that of a secured party who has control under Section 9-104(a)(3).   This section deals with rights of set-off and recoupment that a bank may have under other law. It does not create a right of set-off or recoupment, nor is it intended to override any limitations or restrictions that other law imposes on the exercise of those rights.   3. Preservation of Set-Off Right. Subsection (b) makes clear that a bank may hold both a right of set-off against, and an Article 9 security interest in, the same deposit account. By holding a security interest in a deposit account, a bank does not impair any right of set-off it would otherwise enjoy. This subsection does not pertain to accounts evidenced by an instrument (e.g., certain certificates of deposit), which are excluded from the definition of “deposit accounts.”
CO Code § 4-9-342 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 3 - Perfection and Priority|§ 4-9-342. Bank's Right to Refuse to Enter Into or Disclose Existence of Control Agreement

 This article does not require a bank to enter into an agreement of the kind described in section 4-9-104 (a)(2), even if its customer so requests or directs. A bank that has entered into such an agreement is not required to confirm the existence of the agreement to another person unless requested to do so by its customer.   History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1370, § 1, effective July 1.    OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. New; derived from Section 8-106(g).   2. Protection for Bank. This section protects banks from the need to enter into agreements against their will and from the need to respond to inquiries from persons other than their customers.
CO Code § 4-9-402 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 4 - Rights of Third Parties|§ 4-9-402. Secured Party Not Obligated on Contract of Debtor or in Tort

 The existence of a security interest, agricultural lien, or authority given to a debtor to dispose of or use collateral, without more, does not subject a secured party to liability in contract or tort for the debtor's acts or omissions.   History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1371, § 1, effective July 1.    Editor's note:   This section is similar to former § 4-9-317 as it existed prior to 2001.   OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. Former Section 9-317.   2. Nonliability of Secured Party. This section, like former Section 9-317, rejects theories on which a secured party might be held liable on a debtor's contracts or in tort merely because a security interest exists or because the debtor is entitled to dispose of or use collateral. This section expands former Section 9-317 to cover agricultural liens.   ANNOTATION   Annotator's note. Since § 4-9-402 is similar to § 4-9-317 as it existed prior to the 2001 repeal and reenactment of this article, relevant cases construing that provision have been included in the annotations to this section.   An assignee of contract rights is not subject to contract or tort liabilities imposed by a contract on the assignor in the absence of an assumption of such liabilities. Farmers Acceptance Corp. v. DeLozier, 178 Colo. 291 , 496 P.2d 1016.   Liability of purchasers at foreclosure sale. Where there was no evidence that purchasers at a foreclosure sale affirmatively assumed the contractual liabilities of a corporation, the purchasers are not liable for these contractual obligations. Young v. Golden State Bank, 39 Colo. App. 45, 560 P.2d 855 (1977).   But where a secured creditor initiates or encourages transactions between a debtor and unsecured creditor who is a supplier of goods or services and the secured creditor benefits from the goods or services supplied, equitable principles require the secured creditor to compensate the unsecured creditor to avoid unjust enrichment, especially where the goods or services supplied are necessary for preserving the secured collateral. Ninth Dist. Prod. Credit v. Ed Duggan, 821 P.2d 788 (Colo. 1991).   Applied in Ninth Dist. Prod. Credit v. Ed Duggan, 821 P.2d 788 (Colo. 1991).
CO Code § 4-9-511 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 5 - Filing|§ 4-9-511. Secured Party of Record

  A secured party of record with respect to a financing statement is a person whose name is provided as the name of the secured party or a representative of the secured party in an initial financing statement that has been filed. If an initial financing statement is filed under section 4-9-514 (a), the assignee named in the initial financing statement is the secured party of record with respect to the financing statement.    If an amendment of a financing statement which provides the name of a person as a secured party or a representative of a secured party is filed, the person named in the amendment is a secured party of record. If an amendment is filed under section 4-9-514 (b), the assignee named in the amendment is a secured party of record.    A person remains a secured party of record until the filing of an amendment of the financing statement which deletes the person.     History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1384, § 1, effective July 1.    OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. New.   2. Secured Party of Record. This new section explains how the secured party of record is to be determined. If SP-1 is named as the secured party in an initial financing statement, it is the secured party of record. Similarly, if an initial financing statement reflects a total assignment from SP-0 to SP-1, then SP-1 is the secured party of record. See subsection (a). If, subsequently, an amendment is filed assigning SP-1's status to SP-2, then SP-2 becomes the secured party of record in place of SP-1. The same result obtains if a subsequent amendment deletes the reference to SP-1 and substitutes therefor a reference to SP-2. If, however, a subsequent amendment adds SP-2 as a secured party but does not purport to remove SP-1 as a secured party, then SP-2 and SP-1 each is a secured party of record. See subsection (b). An amendment purporting to remove the only secured party of record without providing a successor is ineffective. See Section 9-512(e). At any point in time, all effective records that comprise a financing statement must be examined to determine the person or persons that have the status of secured party of record.   3. Successor to Secured Party of Record. Application of other law may result in a person succeeding to the powers of a secured party of record. For example, if the secured party of record (A) merges into another corporation (B) and the other corporation (B) survives, other law may provide that B has all of A's powers. In that case, B is authorized to take all actions under this Part that A would have been authorized to take. Similarly, acts taken by a person who is authorized under generally applicable principles of agency to act on behalf of the secured party of record are effective under this Part.
CO Code § 4-9-517 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 5 - Filing|§ 4-9-517. Effect of Indexing Errors

 The failure of the filing office to index a record correctly does not affect the effectiveness of the filed record.   History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1389, § 1, effective July 1.    OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. New.   2. Effectiveness of Mis-Indexed Records. This section provides that the filing office's error in mis-indexing a record does not render ineffective an otherwise effective record. As did former Section 9-401, this section imposes the risk of filing-office error on those who search the files rather than on those who file.
CO Code § 4-9-521 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 5 - Filing|§ 4-9-521. Uniform Form of Written Financing Statement and Amendment

  A filing office that accepts written records may not refuse to accept a written initial financing statement in the form and format adopted from time to time by the secretary of state, except for a reason set forth in section 4-9-516 (b).    A filing office that accepts written records may not refuse to accept a written record in the form and format adopted from time to time by the secretary of state, except for a reason set forth in section 4-9-516 (b).     History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1392, § 1, effective July 1.    Editor's note - Colorado legislative change: Colorado substituted the phrase “form and format adopted from time to time by the secretary of state,” for the phrase “following form and format” in subsections (a) and (b).   OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. New.   2. “Safe Harbor” Written Forms. Although Section 9-520 limits the bases upon which the filing office can refuse to accept records, this section provides sample written forms that must be accepted in every filing office in the country, as long as the filing office's rules permit it to accept written communications. By completing one of the forms in this section, a secured party can be certain that the filing office is obligated to accept it.   The forms in this section are based upon national financing statement forms that were in use under former Article 9. Those forms were developed over an extended period and reflect the comments and suggestions of filing officers, secured parties and their counsel, and service companies. The formatting of those forms and of the ones in this section has been designed to reduce error by both filers and filing offices.   A filing office that accepts written communications may not reject, on grounds of form or format, a filing using these forms. Although filers are not required to use the forms, they are encouraged and can be expected to do so, inasmuch as the forms are well designed and avoid the risk of rejection on the basis of form or format. As their use expands, the forms will rapidly become familiar to both filers and filing-office personnel. Filing offices may and should encourage the use of these forms by declaring them to be the “standard” (but not exclusive) forms for each jurisdiction, albeit without in any way suggesting that alternative forms are unacceptable.   The multi-purpose form in subsection (b) covers changes with respect to the debtor, the secured party, the collateral, and the status of the financing statement (termination and continuation). A single form may be used for several different types of amendments at once (e.g., both to change a debtor's name and continue the effectiveness of the financing statement).