EISMANN, Justice.
This is an appeal from the judgment in which the district court held that where the debtor twice granted security interests in the debtor's equipment to secure payment of two separate loans made by a lender, the second security interest did not have priority over an intervening security interest granted to another lender because the security agreement granting the first security interest did not contain a "future-advances" clause. We hold that the...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.