Legal Opinion

Midkiff Implement Co. v. Worrall

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided July 6, 1983No. 4-82-0838PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Mills

Uniform Commercial Code.

Does “all *** farm machinery *** now owned” mean just that in a security agreement?

It does.

We affirm.

Donald Worrall, a Morgan County farmer, found himself beset by the same plight that has befallen many farmers today — he bought farm machinery which he was unable to pay for. In April of 1977, he purchased a New Holland Model 850 round hay baler from the Midkiff Implement Company. In June of the same year, he purchased a 770 W forage pickup, a New Holland Model 80 bale carrier, and a New Idea Model 404 hay rake from Midkiff. Worrall executed a retail installment…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. James Talcott, Inc. v. Franklin Nat. Bank of Mpls.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
  2. National Cash Register Co. v. Firestone & Co. Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1963
  3. Empire MacHinery Co. v. Union Rock & Materials Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1978
  4. Interstate Steel Co. v. Ramm Manufacturing Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1982

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. City of Chicago v. Michigan Beach Housing CooperativeAppellate Court of Illinois · 1993
  2. Provident Hospital & Training Ass'n v. GMAC Mortgage Co. (In Re Provident Hospital & Training Ass'n)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 1987
  3. In Re Keene Corp.United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1995
  4. In Re NilesUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 1987
  5. In Re YoungUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API