2023 New Mexico Statutes › Chapter 55 - Uniform Commercial Code › Article 9 - Secured Transactions › Part 3 - PERFECTION AND PRIORITY › Subpart 3 - PRIORITY › Section 55-9-336 - Commingled goods.

(a) In this section, "commingled goods" means goods that are physically united with other goods in such a manner that their identity is lost in a product or mass.
(b) A security interest does not exist in commingled goods as such. However, a security interest may attach to a product or mass that results when goods become commingled goods.
(c) If collateral becomes commingled goods, a security interest attaches to the product or mass.
(d) If a security interest in collateral is perfected before the collateral becomes commingled goods, the security interest that attaches to the product or mass under Subsection (c) of this section is perfected.
(e) Except as otherwise provided in Subsection (f) of this section, the other provisions of Sections 55-9-301 through 55-9-342 NMSA 1978 determine the priority of a security interest that attaches to the product or mass under Subsection (c) of this section.
(f) If more than one security interest attaches to the product or mass under Subsection (c) of this section, the following rules determine priority:
(1) a security interest that is perfected under Subsection (d) of this section has priority over a security interest that is unperfected at the time the collateral becomes commingled goods; or
(2) if more than one security interest is perfected under Subsection (d) of this section, the security interests rank equally in proportion to the value of the collateral at the time it became commingled goods.
History:
1978 Comp., § 55-9-336, enacted by Laws 2001, ch. 139, § 56.
OFFICIAL COMMENTS
UCC Official Comments by ALI & the NCCUSL. Reproduced with permission of the PEB for the UCC. All rights reserved.
1. Source. Former section 9-315.
2. "Commingled Goods." Subsection (a) defines "commingled goods." It is meant to include not only goods whose identity is lost through manufacturing or production (e.g., flour that has become part of baked goods) but also goods whose identity is lost by commingling with other goods from which they cannot be distinguished (e.g., ball bearings).
3. Consequences of Becoming "Commingled Goods." By definition, the identity of the original collateral cannot be determined once the original collateral becomes commingled goods. Consequently, the security interest in the specific original collateral alone is lost once the collateral becomes commingled goods, and no security interest in the original collateral can be created thereafter except as a part of the resulting product or mass.
See
subsection (b).
Once collateral becomes commingled goods, the secured party's security interest is transferred from the original collateral to the product or mass.
See
subsection (c). If the security interest in the original collateral was perfected, the security interest in the product or mass is a perfected security interest.
See
subsection (d). This perfection continues until lapse.
4. Priority of Perfected Security Interests That Attach Under This Section. This section governs the priority of competing security interests in a product or mass only when both security interests arise under this section. In that case, if both security interests are perfected by operation of this section (
see
subsections (c) and (d)), then the security interests rank equally, in proportion to the value of the collateral at the time it became commingled goods.
See
subsection (f)(2).
Example 1:
SP-1 has a perfected security interest in Debtor's eggs, which have a value of $300 and secure a debt of $400, and SP-2 has a perfected security interest in Debtor's flour, which has a value of $500 and secures a debt of $600. Debtor uses the flour and eggs to make cakes, which have a value of $1000. The two security interests rank equally and share in the ratio of 3:5. Applying this ratio to the entire value of the product, SP-1 would be entitled to $375 (i.e., 3/8 x $1000), and SP-2 would be entitled to $625 (i.e., 5/8 x $1000).
Example 2:
Assume the facts of Example 1, except that SP-1's collateral, worth $300, secures a debt of $200. Recall that, if the cake is worth $1000, then applying the ratio of 3:5 would entitle SP-1 to $375 and SP-2 to $625. However, SP-1 is not entitled to collect from the product more than it is owed. Accordingly, SP-1's share would be only $200, SP-2 would receive the remaining value, up to the amount it is owed ($600).
Example 3:
Assume that the cakes in the previous examples have a value of only $600. Again, the parties share in the ratio of 3:5. If, as in Example 1, SP-1 is owed $400, then SP-1 is entitled to $225 (i.e., 3/8 x $600), and SP-2 is entitled to $375 (i.e., 5/8 x $600). Debtor receives nothing. If, however, as in Example 2, SP-1 is owed only $200, then SP-2 receives $400.
The results in the foregoing examples remain the same, regardless of whether SP-1 or SP-2 (or each) has a purchase-money security interest.
5. Perfection: Unperfected Security Interests. The rule explained in the preceding comment applies only when both security interests in original collateral are perfected when the goods become commingled goods. If a security interest in original collateral is unperfected at the time the collateral becomes commingled goods, subsection (f)(1) applies.
Example 4:
SP-1 has a perfected security interest in the debtor's eggs, and SP-2 has an unperfected security interest in the debtor's flour. Debtor uses the flour and eggs to make cakes. Under subsection (c), both security interests attach to the cakes. But since SP-1's security interest was perfected at the time of commingling and SP-2's was not, only SP-1's security interest in the cakes is perfected.
See
subsection (d). Under subsection (f)(1) and section 9-322(a)(2), SP-1's perfected security interest has priority over SP-2's unperfected security interest.
If both security interests are unperfected, the rule of section 9-322(a)(3) would apply.
6. Multiple Security Interests. On occasion, a single input may be encumbered by more than one security interest. In those cases, the multiple secured parties should be treated like a single secured party for purposes of determining their collective share under subsection (f)(2). The normal priority rules would determine how that share would be allocated between them. Consider the following example, which is a variation on Example 1 above:
Example 5: SP-1A has a perfected, first-priority security interest in Debtor's eggs. SP-1B has a perfected, second-priority security interest in the same collateral. The eggs have a value of $300. Debtor owes $200 to SP-1A and $200 to SP-1B. SP-2 has a perfected security interest in Debtor's flour, which has a value of $500 and secures a debt of $600. Debtor uses the flour and eggs to make cakes, which have a value of $1000.
For purposes of subsection (f)(2), SP-1A and SP-1B should be treated like a single secured party. The collective security interest would rank equally with that of SP-2. Thus, the secured parties would share in the ratio of 3 (for SP-1A and SP-1B combined) to 5 (for SP-2). Applying this ratio to the entire value of the product, SP-1A and SP-1B in the aggregate would be entitled to $375 (i.e., 3/8 x $1000), and SP-2 would be entitled to $625 (i.e., 5/8 x $1000).
SP-1A and SP-1B would share the $375 in accordance with their priority, as established under other rules. Inasmuch as SP-1A has first priority, it would receive $200, and SP-1B would receive $175.
7. Priority of Security Interests That Attach Other Than by Operation of This Section. Under subsection (e), the normal priority rules determine the priority of a security interest that attaches to the product or mass other than by operation of this section. For example, assume that SP-1 has a perfected security interest in Debtor's existing and after-acquired baked goods, and SP-2 has a perfected security interest in Debtor's flour. When the flour is processed into cakes, subsections (c) and (d) provide that SP-2 acquires a perfected security interest in the cakes. If SP-1 filed against the baked goods before SP-2 filed against the flour, then SP-1 will enjoy priority in the cakes.
See
section 9-322 (first-to-file-or-perfect). But if SP-2 filed against the flour before SP-1 filed against the baked goods, then SP-2 will enjoy priority in the cakes to the extent of its security interest.
ANNOTATIONS
Effective dates.
— Laws 2001, ch. 139, § 155 makes the act effective July 1, 2001.
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. —
Replevin for an undivided share of the mixed mass in case of confusion of goods, 26 A.L.R. 1015.
Commingling of goods subject to trust receipt, 101 A.L.R. 465, 168 A.L.R. 359.
Confusion of goods by accident, mistake or act of a third person, 39 A.L.R.2d 555.