Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ford v. Ford Motor Credit Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided August 3, 2009No. 08-3192Published

1DissentTymkovich, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent because I read the Kansas Uniform Commercial Code, which controls the resolution of this case, as providing a narrower definition of “purchase money security interest” (PMSI) than the majority adopts.

In my view, Kansas law prohibits lenders from using a PMSI to secure a loan for negative equity, even if the loan is bundled with a standard car loan that is itself secured with a PMSI. Therefore, Ford Motor Credit Company does not have a PMSI covering the portion of the Fords’ loan attributable to the $7,200 of negative equity in their truck. And because the hanging…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Butner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
  3. Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  4. Raleigh v. Illinois Department of RevenueSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  5. Jarecki v. G. D. Searle & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961

22 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