Marcus v. McKesson Drug Co. (In re Mistura, Inc.)

ORDER

Appellee has petitioned for rehearing of the panel’s decision on two grounds. Both grounds were fully addressed in the decision, 22 B.R. 60. However, in view of the fact that subsequent authorities have been cited and that appellant apparently perceives little difference — for purposes of this case — between the two leading cases, we comment further.

We read In re Davidoff, 351 F.Supp. 440, 443 (S.D.N.Y.1972) as holding that if all of *587the information a creditor would obtain from reading a copy of the misfiled financing statement had actually been obtained by the creditor, i.e., if he had…